Sevilla v. Ashcroft
This text of 91 F. App'x 607 (Sevilla 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
[608]*608MEMORANDUM
Simon Gonzalez Sevilla and Maria Dolores Ramon Sevilla petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of their application for suspension of deportation.1 They claim that they are entitled to relief because the BIA did not notify them of the possibility of asking for “repapering” pursuant to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, § 309(c)(3), Pub.L. 104-208, 110 Stat. at 3009-626 and the proposed regulations thereunder. See Delegation of Authority to the Immigration and Naturalization Service To Terminate Deportation Proceedings and Initiate Removal Proceedings, 65 Fed.Reg. 71,273 (proposed Nov. 30, 2000) (to be codified at 8 C.F.R. §§ 240.80-82). We dismiss the petition.
Whatever the merits of their claim might be, an issue on which we do not opine, the fact remains that we lack jurisdiction over it because they never presented it to the BIA. See 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(c) (1994); Liu v. Waters, 55 F.3d 421, 425-26 (9th Cir.1995); Rashtabadi v. INS, 23 F.3d 1562, 1567 (9th Cir.1994); Vargas v. U.S. Dept. of Immigration & Naturalization, 831 F.2d 906, 907-08 (9th Cir.1987); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d). Thus, we are constrained to dismiss the petition.
Petition 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
91 F. App'x 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sevilla-v-ashcroft-ca9-2004.