Balingasa v. Ashcroft
This text of 107 F. App'x 104 (Balingasa v. Ashcroft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Edison Averilla Balingasa, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision, which dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction because Balingasa waived his right to appeal the Immigration Judge’s decision finding him ineligible for cancellation of removal, asylum or voluntary departure, and finding him removable. This court lacks jurisdiction to review the removal order because Balingasa waived his right of appeal thereby failing to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Joo v. INS, 813 F.2d 211, 212 (9th Cir.1987) (per curiam). We therefore dismiss the petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 F. App'x 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/balingasa-v-ashcroft-ca9-2004.