NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NELSON NOEL VASQUEZ, No. 13-74441
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-883-818
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Nelson Noel Vasquez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his
motion to reconsider and reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
motion to reopen or reconsider. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th
Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Vasquez’s motion to
reconsider because he failed to identify any error of fact or law in the BIA’s prior
order. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1).
We lack jurisdiction to review Vasquez’s unexhausted contentions regarding
compliance with Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), and
administrative closure. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004)
(court lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of a legal claim not presented in
administrative proceedings below).
We do not consider the extra-record evidence submitted for the first time
with Vasquez’s opening brief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A) (judicial review is
limited to the administrative record); Dent v. Holder, 627 F.3d 365, 371 (9th Cir.
2010) (stating standard for review of out-of-record evidence).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 13-74441