Griselda Fernandez-Sanchez v. Merrick Garland ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JAN 24 2022
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    GRISELDA FERNANDEZ-SANCHEZ,                      No.   19-73057
    Petitioner,                      Agency No. A200-551-973
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
    General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted January 19, 2022**
    Before:      SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    Griselda Fernandez-Sanchez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
    terminate proceedings and dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s
    (“IJ”) decision denying her motion for a continuance. We have jurisdiction under
    *
    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 for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
    terminate. Dominguez v. Barr, 
    975 F.3d 725
    , 734 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the
    petition for review.
    In her opening brief, Fernandez-Sanchez does not raise any challenge to the
    agency’s denial of her motion for a continuance. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder,
    
    706 F.3d 1072
    , 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued
    in a party’s opening brief are waived).
    The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Fernandez-Sanchez’s
    motion to terminate removal proceedings, where her challenges to the immigration
    court’s jurisdiction are foreclosed by Karingithi v. Whitaker, 
    913 F.3d 1158
    , 1159
    (9th Cir. 2019), and Aguilar Fermin v. Barr, 
    958 F.3d 887
    , 895 n.4 (9th Cir. 2020),
    because she received a notice of hearing that included the time, date, and place of
    the hearing.
    The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
    mandate.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                   19-73057
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-73057

Filed Date: 1/24/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/24/2022