FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 10 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PEDRO PRECIADO, No. 08-74178
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-174-524
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Pedro Preciado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by
*
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).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the 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.
Contrary to the respondent’s contention, Preciado’s petition for review was
timely filed on September 29, 2008. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Fed. R. App. P.
26(a)(1)(C).
The agency did not abuse its discretion by not granting a continuance where
Preciado did not request a continuance.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Preciado’s challenge to the IJ’s
determination that he is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i) because he
failed to exhaust it. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 08-74178