Hung Hoang v. Eric Holder, Jr.

480 F. App'x 892
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 17, 2012
Docket10-73133
StatusUnpublished

This text of 480 F. App'x 892 (Hung Hoang v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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.

Bluebook
Hung Hoang v. Eric Holder, Jr., 480 F. App'x 892 (9th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Hung Ngoc Hoang and Kim Hue Thi Au, natives and citizens of Vietnam, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the government’s appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision granting their applications for a waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Hoang’s application for discretionary relief under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i). See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(i)(2), 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Corona-Mendez v. Holder; 593 F.3d 1143, 1146 (9th Cir.2010). To the extent Hoang argues that the BIA violated his constitutional rights by denying his application for a waiver under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i), Hoang has not shown that he is similarly situated to Huynh. See Dillingham v. INS, 267 F.3d 996, 1007 (9th Cir.2001) (“In order to succeed on his [equal protection] challenge, the petitioner must establish that his treatment differed from that of similarly situated persons.”)

In their opening brief, petitioners fail to raise, and therefore have waived, any challenge to the BIA’s denial of Au’s application for relief. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n. 3 (9th Cir.2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rizk v. Holder
629 F.3d 1083 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
Corona-Mendez v. Holder
593 F.3d 1143 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
480 F. App'x 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hung-hoang-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2012.