Chang Kim v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 10 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CHANG HOON KIM, a.k.a. Frank Chang No. 08-74508 Hoon Kim, Agency No. A070-932-670 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 2, 2011 ** Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Chang Hoon Kim, a native and citizen of South Korea, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review. * 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). We reject Kim’s contention that the government failed to establish removability by clear and convincing evidence, because Kim conceded removability. See Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1024 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[W]here the alien concedes removability, the government’s burden in this regard is satisfied.” (citation and quotation omitted)). Kim’s contention that the government should be equitably estopped from ordering his removal is unavailing. See Sulit v. Schiltgen, 213 F.3d 449, 454 (9th Cir. 2000) (“[E]stoppel against the government is unavailable where petitioners have not lost any rights to which they were entitled.”); cf. Salgado-Diaz v. Gonzalez, 395 F.3d 1158, 1165-68 (9th Cir. 2005). Kim’s remaining contentions are not persuasive. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 08-74508