Rodriguez-Vera v. Holder

348 F. App'x 280

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rodriguez-Vera argues that, because Revised Code of Washington § 9.41.170 includes antique firearms in its definition of firearms, his conviction under that statute does not categorically qualify as a firearm offense for purposes of being statuto rily ineligible for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229(b)(1)(C) (referencing 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)). But Rodriguez-Vera failed to raise this argument before the BIA. Accordingly, Rodriguez-Vera failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, see Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th Cir.2004) (holding that a petitioner “must specify which issues form the basis of the appeal”), and we lack jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Tejeda-Mata v. INS, 626 F.2d 721, 726 (9th Cir.1980) (holding that “if a petitioner wishes to preserve an issue for appeal, he must first raise it in the proper administrative forum”).

DISMISSED.

Footnotes

**

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