Case Name: David JUAREZ, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-07-17
Citations: 693 F. App'x 668
Docket Number: No. 13-72779
Parties: David JUAREZ, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 693
Pages: 668–669

Head Matter:
David JUAREZ, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 13-72779
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 11, 2017
Filed July 17, 2017
Philippe Dwelshauvers, Esquire, Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Petitioner
Michael Christopher Heyse, Trial Attorney, OIL, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
David Juarez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
The agency found Juarez did not establish eligibility for asylum on the basis of having either soldiers or guerillas attempt to recruit him in El Salvador. We lack jurisdiction to consider the contention Juarez raises for the first time in his opening brief that he was or- would be persecuted as a member of a particular social group of children who refused conscription. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner must exhaust claims in administrative proceedings below).
Apart from his social group argument, Juarez does not otherwise challenge the agency's reasons for denying his asylum claim. Thus, we deny the petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DisMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3..