Case Name: Pablo Roberto ORTEGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-28
Citations: 187 F. App'x 402
Docket Number: No. 05-60812
Parties: Pablo Roberto ORTEGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 187
Pages: 402–403

Head Matter:
Pablo Roberto ORTEGA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-60812.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided June 28, 2006.
Pablo Roberto Ortega, Bronx, NY, pro se.
Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Norah Ascoli Schwarz, Elizabeth J. Stevens, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, John Clifford Cunningham, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Caryl G. Thompson, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, pro se.
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Pablo Roberto Ortega petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying Ortega's motion to reopen his removal proceedings. He argues that the BIA should have reopened his removal proceedings in order to allow him to pursue relief under § 212(c) and (h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
This court lacks jurisdiction to consider Ortega's argument that the BIA should have reopened his case pursuant to the BIA's sua sponte authority. See Enriquez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 246, 250 (5th Cir.2004). Ortega's contention that this court has the authority to examine sua sponte whether relief under INA § 212(c) and (h) is available to Ortega lacks merit. Moreover, Ortega has failed to brief any other cognizable issues regarding the BIA's decision. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir.2003). Accordingly, Ortega's petition for review of the BIA's decision is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.