FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 27 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IGNACIO AGUILAR-IXTAS, No. 14-70361
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-774-309
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Ignacio Aguilar-Ixtas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales,
*
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).
400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the
petition for review.
Aguilar-Ixtas did not raise, and has therefore waived, any challenge to the
BIA’s denial of his motion as untimely. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091
n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (issues not raised in the opening brief are waived).
The record does not support Aguilar-Ixtas’ contention that the BIA failed to
consider the correct basis for his hardship claim, where the BIA’s decision
evaluated hardship “upon remaining in this country or upon returning” to Mexico.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to reopen proceedings
sua sponte. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 14-70361