Case Name: Maria Elena JACQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-17
Citations: 136 F. App'x 85
Docket Number: No. 03-72760
Parties: Maria Elena JACQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 136
Pages: 85–86

Head Matter:
Maria Elena JACQUEZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-72760.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 14, 2005.
Decided June 17, 2005.
Michael Franquinha, Law Office of Michael Franquinha, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, David V; Bernal, Attorney, Anthony C. Payne, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: KLEINFELD, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Alberto R. Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Maria Elena Jacquez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' summary affirmance without opinion of an Immigration Judge's denial of her motion to reopen proceedings and rescind her in absentia deportation order. We dismiss the petition for review.
Because Jacquez did not exhaust her equitable tolling argument before the agency, we lack jurisdiction to consider it. See Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1183 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). We therefore do not reach Jacquez's contentions concerning her eligibility for suspension of deportation.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
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.