Case Name: Andres D. HERRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-01
Citations: 380 F. App'x 729
Docket Number: No. 08-72521
Parties: Andres D. HERRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 380
Pages: 729–730

Head Matter:
Andres D. HERRERA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 08-72521.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 25, 2010.
Decided June 1, 2010.
Andres D. Herrera, Pacoima, CA, pro se.
John Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAS-Distriet Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, 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
Andres D. Herrera, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's order of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Herrera fails to address, and therefore has waived, any challenge to the BIA's dispositive determinations that he failed to establish good moral character, see 8 C.F.R. § 1240.66(b)(3), as required for special rule cancellation of removal, or eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal or relief under the Convention Against Torture. See Husyev v. Mukasey, 528 F.3d 1172, 1183 (9th Cir.2008).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.