NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 13 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MIGUEL GOMEZ-CERVANTES, Nos. 14-70917
14-72522
Petitioner,
Agency No. A072-158-261
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney MEMORANDUM*
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 11, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated petitions for review, Miguel Gomez-Cervantes, a
native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of both an immigration judge’s
(“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen reasonable fear proceedings, and the
*
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).
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from the IJ’s order.
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in
part the petitions for review.
Gomez-Cervantes does not raise in his opening brief, and has therefore
waived, any challenge to the agency’s grounds for denial of his motion to reopen.
See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not
specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are waived). We do not consider
Gomez-Cervantes’ contentions in his reply brief regarding the motion to reopen.
See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (“It is well
established in this circuit that [t]he general rule is that appellants cannot raise a
new issue for the first time in their reply briefs.” (citation and internal quotation
marks omitted, alteration in original)).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Gomez-Cervantes’ contentions regarding
whether his reinstatement order is valid, where this petition is not timely as to that
order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1); Ortiz-Alfaro v. Holder, 694 F.3d 955, 958-59
(9th Cir. 2012).
PETITIONS FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 14-70917