FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 07 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EUN KYEONG SEO, No. 07-71337
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-266-275
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009 **
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Eun Kyeong Seo, a native and citizen of Korea, petitions pro se for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
LA/Research
immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
In her opening brief, Seo fails to address, and therefore has waived any
challenge to, the BIA’s determination that she was not entitled to a continuance.
See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996).
This court lacks jurisdiction over the United States Citizenship and
Immigration Services’ (“USCIS”) determinations regarding U Visas. See Ramirez
Sanchez v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1254, 1255 -1256 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam)
(USCIS has sole jurisdiction over the issuance of U Visa petitions); see also 8
U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U)(i)(I).
We lack jurisdiction to review Seo’s contention regarding the alleged
ineffective assistance of her prior counsel because she did not raise that issue
before the BIA and thereby failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. See
Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
LA/Research 2 07-71337