Case Name: Reyna Mireya Barrera ARAGON, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-20
Citations: 309 F. App'x 190
Docket Number: No. 07-73168
Parties: Reyna Mireya Barrera ARAGON, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 309
Pages: 190–191

Head Matter:
Reyna Mireya Barrera ARAGON, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-73168.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 13, 2009.
Filed Jan. 20, 2009.
Reyna Mireya Barrera Aragon, San Juan Capistrano, CA, pro se.
CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum, OIL, Stacy Stiffel Paddack, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, BYBEE, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Reyna Mireya Barrera Aragon, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying her motion to reconsider the BIA's initial decision summarily affirming the immigration judge's denial, as numerically barred, of petitioner's second motion to reopen the underlying denial of her application for cancellation of removal.
Petitioner has waived any challenge to the BIA's order, denying her motion to reconsider, by failing to raise any arguments related to the BIA's dispositive determination that petitioner failed to identify a material factual or legal error in its prior decision. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.