Case Name: Fabio Orlando Cruz TORRES, aka Orlando Flabio Cruz, aka Flabio Nino, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-01-26
Citations: 632 F. App'x 375
Docket Number: No. 13-73529
Parties: Fabio Orlando Cruz TORRES, aka Orlando Flabio Cruz, aka Flabio Nino, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 632
Pages: 375–375

Head Matter:
Fabio Orlando Cruz TORRES, aka Orlando Flabio Cruz, aka Flabio Nino, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 13-73529.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 20, 2016.
Filed Jan. 26, 2016.
Zulu Ali, Zulu Abdullah Ali, Riverside, CA, for Petitioner.
Monica Antoun, Esquire, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, 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
Fabio Orlando Cruz Torres, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir.2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Cruz Torres' motion to reopen because it was untimely, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Cruz Torres failed to establish that any regulatory exception to the time limitation for filing a motion to reopen applied, see 8 C.F.R, § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 992 (court "defers to the Board's exercise of discretion unless it acted arbitrarily, irrationally or contrary to law").
We lack jurisdiction to consider Cruz Torres' contentions regarding relief under the Convention Against Torture because he did not raise them to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (petitioner must exhaust claims in administrative proceedings below).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.