Case Name: Fidel SOLANO-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. John D. ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-09
Citations: 52 F. App'x 374
Docket Number: No. 01-71894; INS No. A75-671-137
Parties: Fidel SOLANO-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. John D. ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before D.W. NELSON, T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges and SCHWARZER, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 52
Pages: 374–374

Head Matter:
Fidel SOLANO-CRUZ, Petitioner, v. John D. ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 01-71894.
INS No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 3, 2002.
Decided Dec. 9, 2002.
Before D.W. NELSON, T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges and SCHWARZER, District Judge.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
The Honorable William W Schwarzer, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Solano-Cruz appeals a Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") order dismissing his petition, which sought cancellation of removal for certain non-permanent residents under § 240(A)(b)(l) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA"), 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l) (2002). We have jurisdiction pursuant to § 242(a)(1) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we affirm.
Solano-Cruz seeks review of the Immigration Judge's determination that he failed to show ten years of continuous presence in the United States for the first time in this appeal. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A). Because he did not raise this issue in his appeal before the BIA, Solano-Cruz has not exhausted the administrative remedies available to him, and we lack jurisdiction to hear this claim. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2002); INA § 242(d)(1); see also Sanchez-Cruz v. INS, 255 F.3d 775, 780 (9th Cir.2001); Rashtabadi v. INS, 23 F.3d 1562, 1567 (9th Cir.1994).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.