Case ID: f-appx_668/html/0705-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jose Arana OLIVARES, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 15-70594
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted August 16, 2016 
    
    Filed August 24, 2016
    Jose Arana Olivares, Pro Se.
    Guelda Hadley Bajramovie, Esquire, Attorney, Immigration Law Offices of Had-ley Bajramovie, Riverside, CA, for Petitioner.
    Chief Counsel ICE, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, John Frederick Stanton, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Arana Olivares, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an immigration judge’s order affirming the decision of an asylum officer during expedited removal proceedings. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review Arana Olivares’s removal order because it was issued pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1), and none of the exceptions to the restriction on judicial review of expedited removal orders apply. See Pena v. Lynch, 815 F.3d 452, 455-56 (9th Cir. 2016) (concluding court generally lacks jurisdiction to review removal orders issued pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1), and describing the exceptions).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.