Case Name: Saul Ballardo CASTRO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-16
Citations: 225 F. App'x 552
Docket Number: No. 05-71972
Parties: Saul Ballardo CASTRO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 225
Pages: 552–552

Head Matter:
Saul Ballardo CASTRO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-71972.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2007.
Filed March 16, 2007.
Saul Ballardo Castro, Victorville, CA, pro se.
CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Stephen J. Flynn Fax, Jennifer L. Lightbody, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: KOZINSKI, LEAVY and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Saul Ballardo Castro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Ballardo Castro fails to address, and therefore has waived any challenge to, the BIA's determination that he failed to establish ten years of continuous physical presence. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996) (holding that issues not specifically raised and argued in a party's opening brief are waived).
The BIA properly determined that even if Ballardo Castro is the beneficiary of an approved 1-130 visa petition, an approved visa petition does not give him lawful immigration status or automatically entitle him to relief. See Ngongo v. Ashcroft, 397 F.3d 821, 823 (9th Cir.2005).
Ballardo Castro's remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.