NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAR 11 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
MIGUEL SANTILLAN-AVILEZ, No. 10-70296
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-718-439
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2013**
Pasadena, California
Before: BERZON and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF, Senior District
Judge.***
Miguel Santillan-Avilez contends the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
and the immigration judge (IJ) should have applied the modified categorical
*
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).
***
The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, Senior United States District Judge for
the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.
analysis to determine whether Santillan’s California conviction for possession of a
controlled substance rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. But
Santillan never put the BIA on notice of this issue, because he never mentioned it
in his notice of appeal or his brief to the BIA. See Figueroa v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d
487, 492 (9th Cir. 2008). Nor did the BIA review and discuss the issue in its
decision affirming the IJ’s order. Accordingly, Santillan’s failure to exhaust his
administrative remedies deprives us of subject-matter jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. §
1252(d)(1); Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
PETITION DISMISSED.
2