Case ID: f-appx_667/html/0952-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Edgar Roberto QUIX, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 15-70303
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 26, 2016 
    
    FILED August 03, 2016
    Miguel Angel Olano, Miguel Olano, Attorney at Law, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner
    Annette Marie Wietecha, Trial Attorney, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent
    Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Edgar Roberto Quix, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) January 23, 2015, order reinstating his 2011 order of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Our review is “limited to confirming the agency’s compliance with the reinstatement regulations.” Garcia de Rincon v. DHS, 539 F.3d 1133, 1137 (9th Cir. 2008). The underlying reinstated removal order may only be reviewed for a “gross miscarriage of justice.” Id. at 1138. We deny the petition for review.

Quix does not dispute the factual predicates for reinstatement. See id. at 1137 (listing the three determinations underlying a reinstatement order' that may be reviewed). Quix has not established a gross miscarriage of justice in his underlying removal proceedings based on his transfer to detention in another state or his prior attorney’s alleged failure to challenge the transfer as a due process violation. See id. at 1138.

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