Case Name: Gumaro QUINTERO-FELIX, aka Gumaro Felix, aka Gumaro Quintero, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-25
Citations: 623 F. App'x 452
Docket Number: No. 14-70343
Parties: Gumaro QUINTERO-FELIX, aka Gumaro Felix, aka Gumaro Quintero, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 623
Pages: 452–452

Head Matter:
Gumaro QUINTERO-FELIX, aka Gumaro Felix, aka Gumaro Quintero, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 14-70343.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2015.
Filed Nov. 25, 2015.
Sanjay Sobti, Esquire, U.S. Law Center, Corona, CA, for Petitioner.
Regina Byrd, Esquire, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, 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
Gumaro Quintero-Felix, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order summarily affirming an immigration judge's ("U") decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We dismiss the petition for review.
Both before the BIA and this court, Quintero-Felix failed to challenge the IJ's dispositive determination that he is not eligible for asylum and withholding of removal because his 2005 conviction is an aggravated felony and a particularly serious crime. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii), (B)(i) (asylum); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii) (withholding); see also Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir.2010) (the court lacks jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an alien's administrative proceedings before the agency); Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n. 3 (9th Cir. 2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief).
In light of this disposition, we need not reach Quintero-Felix's remaining contentions.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.