Case ID: f-appx_707/html/0779-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Juan Simeri CRUZ, a/k/a Juan Simeri Pineda Cruz, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 17-1749
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 16, 2017
    Decided: January 2, 2018
    Juan Simeri Cruz, Petitioner Pro Se. Madeline Henley, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPART-, MENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Juan Simeri Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture, Cruz has waived review of his applications for relief because he fails to challenge the Board’s decisions denying those applications in his informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Suarez-Valenzuela v. Holder, 714 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th Cir. 2013) (deeming issues not raised in opening brief waived). We also conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion by not remanding the proceedings to consider Cruz’s application for cancellation of removal. See Hussain v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 153, 155 (4th Cir. 2007) (stating standard of review). Finally, we conclude that Cruz failed to establish a due process violation. See Anim v. Mukasey, 535 F.3d 243, 256 (4th Cir. 2008) (noting that burden is on applicant to show that defect in proceedings prejudiced outcome).

Accordingly, while we grant Cruz leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions .are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED