Court Opinion

ID: 178642
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-11-02 21:03:53+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:45.515053
License: Public Domain

FILED
                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            NOV 02 2010

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

YILIN ZHANG,                                     No. 09-71669

               Petitioner,                       Agency No. A097-867-607

  v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

               Respondent.

                      On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals

                             Submitted October 19, 2010 **

Before:        O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

       Yilin Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration

judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and

protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual

findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and we dismiss

in part and deny in part the petition for review.

      We lack jurisdiction to review Zhang’s claim that the transcript of the

hearing testimony was incomplete because he failed to raise the argument before

the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (no

jurisdiction over legal claims not presented in administrative proceedings below).

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition with respect to that claim.

      Zhang failed to raise any substantive challenge to the BIA’s denial of his

claims for relief in his opening brief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,

1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s

opening brief are waived). Accordingly, we deny the petition as to his asylum,

withholding of removal, and CAT claims.

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

                                           2                                    09-71669