Hien Xuan Cao v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
AP/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HIEN XUAN CAO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-73632
Agency No. A074-465-984
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 15, 2009**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Hien Xuan Cao, a native and citizen of Vietnam, petitions pro se for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
FILED
JAN 05 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AP/Research 06-73632 2
removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny
in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Cao fails to address, and therefore has waived any
challenge to, the BIA’s June 28, 2006, decision denying reopening. See Martinez-
Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues that are not
specifically raised and argued in a party’s opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s August 4, 2003, order dismissing
Cao’s direct appeal from the immigration judge’s decision because this petition for
review is not timely as to that order. See Singh v. INS, 315 F.3d 1186, 1188 (9th
Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --