Rui Han v. William Barr
This text of Rui Han v. William Barr (Rui Han v. William Barr) 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 20 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RUI ZHEN HAN, No. 18-72143
Petitioner, Agency No. A073-535-011
v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 14, 2020**
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Rui Zhen Han, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying a waiver of removal under
Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 237(a)(1)(H). We dismiss the petition
for review.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary denial of Han’s
237(a)(l)(H) waiver application because she does not present an exhausted
constitutional claim or question of law. See Vasquez v. Holder, 602 F.3d 1003,
1017 (9th Cir. 2010) (while the court lacks jurisdiction to review the discretionary
denial of a 237(a)(1)(H) waiver, it may review constitutional claims or questions of
law). Han failed to exhaust her contentions that the agency made an erroneous
adverse credibility determination and that the agency violated due process by
failing to provide an opportunity to explain inconsistencies in her testimony. See
Agyeman v. INS, 296 F.3d 871, 877 (9th Cir. 2002) (no jurisdiction to entertain due
process claims based on correctable procedural errors unless the petitioner raised
them below).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
2 18-72143
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rui Han v. William Barr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rui-han-v-william-barr-ca9-2020.