FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FAUSTO JIMENEZ, No. 09-73028
Petitioner, Agency No. A092-445-131
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 11, 2013**
Pasadena, California
Before: PAEZ and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and ERICKSON, Chief District
Judge.***
*
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).
***
The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Chief District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the District of North Dakota, sitting by designation.
Fausto Jimenez (“Jimenez”), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of a final administrative removal order. We dismiss the petition for review in
part and deny in it part.
We lack jurisdiction over Jimenez’s claims concerning the Attorney General’s
decision to place him in expedited removal, his classification as an aggravated felon,
his lawful permanent resident status, and his right to apply for relief from removal.
Jimenez failed to exhaust these claims before the Deciding Service Officer, as allowed
by 8 C.F.R. § 238.1(c). See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2003); 8
U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (“A court may review a final order of removal only if . . . the
alien has exhausted all administrative remedies available to the alien as of right.”).
Although we have jurisdiction to consider Jimenez’s constitutional challenge
to the Attorney General’s authority to place him in expedited removal proceedings,
8 U.S.C. § 1228(b), that claim is foreclosed by United States v. Calderon–Segura, 512
F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2008).
Jimenez’s motion to file a supplemental brief is denied.
DISMISSED IN PART; DENIED IN PART; MOTION TO FILE
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF DENIED.
2