Mateo Jacinto-Gonzalez v. William Barr ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 13 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MATEO JACINTO-GONZALEZ, No. 19-72702
Petitioner, Agency No. A204-412-129
v.
MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 6, 2020**
Before: BERZON, N.R. SMITH, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Mateo Jacinto-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order (i) dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying cancellation of
removal, and (ii) denying his motion for administrative closure and motion to
remand. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of
*
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).
discretion the denial of a motion to remand. Taggar v. Holder, 736 F.3d 886, 889
(9th Cir. 2013). We deny the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Jacinto-Gonzalez fails to raise any challenge to the
BIA’s denial of cancellation of removal or his request for administrative closure.
See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (petitioner
waives a contention by failing to raise it in the opening brief).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Jacinto-Gonzalez’s motion
to remand for the IJ to continue proceedings, where he has not established prima
facie eligibility for a U visa. See Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir.
2010) (BIA may deny motion to reopen for failure to establish prima facie
eligibility for relief); see also Matter of Sanchez Sosa, 25 I. & N. Dec. 807, 814
(BIA 2012) (where U visa applicant is inadmissible, IJ “should assess the
likelihood that USCIS will exercise its discretion favorably under the regulatory
standard as part of the determination of prima facie eligibility”).
Jacinto-Gonzalez’s motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 1) is
denied as moot.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 19-72702