NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 30 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERTO GARCIA CEJA, AKA Robert No. 15-73795
Ceja Garcia,
Agency No. A091-699-733
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Roberto Garcia Ceja, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for cancellation of removal
and a waiver under former 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). Our jurisdiction is governed by
*
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).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Segura v. Holder, 605 F.3d
1063, 1066 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
The agency did not err in concluding that Garcia Ceja’s admission as a legal
permanent resident was not lawful, where he had been previously convicted of
felony possession of cocaine. See id. (“Although an alien may have been admitted
for permanent residence, he has not been lawfully admitted for permanent
residence if he was precluded from obtaining permanent resident status due to an
inability to meet the prerequisites.”); 8 U.S.C. § 1255a(b)(1)(C)(ii) (requiring the
applicant to establish that he has not been convicted of any felony). Accordingly,
the agency did not err in finding Garcia Ceja ineligible for cancellation of removal
and a waiver of inadmissibility. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(a), 1182(c) (repealed 1996)
(both requiring “lawful admission” as a prerequisite to relief).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Garcia Ceja’s unexhausted contention that
the government waived the admissibility requirement in his case. See Tijani v.
Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (the court lacks jurisdiction to
consider legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative proceedings before
the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 15-73795