Case ID: f-appx_632/html/0366-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. Jesus BARRON-MIRANDA, aka Jesus Jose Barron, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-73263.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 20, 2016.
    
    Filed Jan. 26, 2016.
    Joel Henry Wolff, Law Offices of Joel H. Wolff, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.
    Andrea Gevas, Stefanie A. Svoren-Jay, Trial, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

J. Jesus Barron-Miranda, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider, Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252; Alphonsus v. Holder, 705 F.3d 1031, 1036-37 (9th Cir.2013). We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Barron-Miranda’s motion to reconsider because he failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Barron-Miranda’s contentions regarding relief under the Convention Against Torture because he did not raise them in his motion to reconsider. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.