Braulia Moralez-Esiquio v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 18 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BRAULIA MORALEZ-ESIQUIO, No. 08-72980 Petitioner, Agency No. A099-577-374 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 10, 2011 ** Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Braulia Moralez-Esiquio, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her request for a continuance. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the * 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). denial of a continuance. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying a continuance because Moralez-Esiquio did not demonstrate good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29 (an IJ may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown). We lack jurisdiction to review Moralez-Esiquio’s due process claim because she failed to raise it before the BIA and thereby failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review contentions not raised before the agency). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 08-72980