Case Name: Gabriel FELIX-FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-23
Citations: 329 F. App'x 739
Docket Number: No. 06-72259
Parties: Gabriel FELIX-FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 329
Pages: 739–740

Head Matter:
Gabriel FELIX-FERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-72259.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 14, 2009.
Filed July 23, 2009.
Robin Chandler Carr, Esquire, Law Offices of Robin Chandler Carr, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.
CAS-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Mary Jane Candaux, Esquire, Nancy Ellen Friedman, Trial, Kiley L. Kane, Esquire, Trial, Blair T. O’Connor, Esquire, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Gabriel Felix-Fernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his request for permission to withdraw his application for admission to the United States. We dismiss the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency's discretionary denial of Felix-Fernandez's request to withdraw his application for admission. See Avendano-Ramirez v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 813, 819 (9th Cir.2004).
We deny Felix-Fernandez's motion to remand to the BIA for consideration of his eligibility for cancellation of removal. See Ortiz v. INS, 179 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir.1999) (where an alien becomes newly eligible for relief "the proper procedure is for the alien to move the BIA to reopen proceedings, not to petition this Court to compel the BIA to reopen").
We stay the mandate for 90 days from the date this disposition is filed to allow Felix-Fernandez an opportunity to file a motion to reopen with the BIA. See id.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED; MANDATE STAYED FOR 90 DAYS.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.