Leodegari Contreras-Reyes v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LEODEGARI CONTRERAS-REYES,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70088
Agency No. A099-475-210
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 19, 2013**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Leodegari Contreras-Reyes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Our
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
FILED
DEC 11 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

the agency’s continuous physical presence determination. Ibarra-Flores v.
Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and dismiss in part
the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Contreras-
Reyes did not demonstrate ten years of continuous physical presence in the United
States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) (departure for any periods exceeding 180 days
in the aggregate breaks continuous physical presence).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Contreras-Reyes’ due process claim
regarding the lack of an interpreter at his removal hearing because he did not raise
it before the agency and therefore failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.
See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (this court lacks
jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
12-70088 2

-- 2 of 2 --