T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2).

T he H onor abl e R i c a r do S . M a rt i ne z , U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJudge f or ** * the W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof

W a s hi ngt on, s i tt i ng byde s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T HA NG NA M YOO N, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 05- 74544 A ge nc yN o. A 035- 138- 732 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e titio n f

o rR e v ie w o f

a n O r d e ro f

th e B o a r do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 14, 2010 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia Be f o r e : KO ZINSKI , Ch i e f

Ju d g e , CALL AH AN , Ci r c u i tJu d g e , a n dM ARTINEZ, D i stri ctJudg e. *** 

# FI LED MA Y06 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSW e deny Y oo n’ s m ot i on t o fi l e al at e r epl y bri ef . 1 A lth o u g h Y o o n a r g u e s th a t Ferna ndez -R uiz v . G on zales , 466 F . 3d 1121 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) ( e n b a n c ) , r e p r e s e n te dac h a n g e in c o n tr o llin g law , Fe rn a n dez - R u iz m e r e l yappl i e d the S upr e m e C ourt ’ s de c i s i on i n L e oc al . T h u s, p etit io n er ’s arg u m en t s w ere av ai l ab l e as so o n as L e oc al w as deci ded and coul d h ave been p r e s e n t e di n h i s p r i o rp e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. 2 H a ng N a m Y oon ( “ Y oon” ) , ac i t i z e n of S outh K or e a , br i ngs thi s s e c ond pe t i t i on f orr e vi e w of

the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ ( “ B I A ” ) A ugus t2004 o r d e ro f r e m o v a l, w h ic h d e e m e dY o o n r e m o v ab le u n d e rI N A § 2 3 7 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( iii) ba s e d on a n a ggr a va t e d f e l onyc onvi c t i on. T hi s c ourta l r e a dyde c i de d i n Y oo n v. 1 G on zales , C as e N o. 04 -743 07 , thatY oo n’ s c on vi ct i on const i tut es an aggravat ed f e lo n y , a n dc o n s e q u e n tlyth a t th e B I A ’s r e m o v a l o r d e rw a s v a lid , w h e n it di s m i s s e d Y oon’ s f

i r s tpe t i t i on f

orr e vi e w f

orl a c k of

j ur i s di c t i on. B e c aus e Y oon coul d h ave pres ent ed hi s argum ent s c on ce rni ng the ef fe ctof L e o c a l v . A s h c r o ft , 543 U . S . 1 ( 2004) , i n hi s f i r s tpe t i t i on, w hi c h w a s de c i de d m or e tha n tw o m onths pr i ort o thi s c ourt ’ s di s m i s s a l of tha tpe t i t i on, the pr e s e ntpe t i t i on doe s notpr e s e nt gr ounds tha tc oul d notha ve be e n pr e s e nt e d i n the pr i orj udi c i a l pr oc e e di ng. N or 2 ha s Y oon s how n tha tthe pr i orpr oc e e di ng w a s i na de qua t e ori ne f f e c t i ve t o t e s tthe v alid ity o f th e B IA ’s o rd er . A cc o rd in g ly, w e lac kju risd icti o n to re v iew Y o o n ’s s e c o n dp e titio n . 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 ( d ) ( 2 ) ; se e N u n es v . A s h c r o

ft , 375 F . 3d 805, 809- 10 (9th C i r. 20 03 ).3

P E T I T I ON DI S MI S S E D.