Case Name: Vrezh SHIRVANIAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-01-20
Citations: 86 F. App'x 337
Docket Number: No. 03-71199; Agency No. A79-391-880
Parties: Vrezh SHIRVANIAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 86
Pages: 337–338

Head Matter:
Vrezh SHIRVANIAN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-71199.
Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 12, 2004.
Decided Jan. 20, 2004.
Houman Varzandeh, Law Offices of Zaman & Varzandeh, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Laguna Niguel, CA, Los Angeles District Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, David V. Bernal, Attorney, Jamie M. Dowd, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before BEEZER, HALL, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Vrezh Shirvanian, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") summary affirmance of an immigration judge's denial of his motion to reopen an in absentia removal proceeding.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Shirvanian's contentions regarding his alleged failure to receive notice of his removal hearing because he failed to raise those issues before the BIA. See Cortez-Acosta v. INS, 284 F.3d 476, 480 (9th Cir.2000) ("Failure to raise an issue in an appeal to the BIA constitutes a failure to exhaust all administrative remedies available . and deprives this court of jurisdiction to hear the matter.").
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 may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.