Case: 16-60618 Document: 00514217330 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/31/2017 REVISED OCTOBER 31, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 16-60618 Fifth Circuit FILED Summary Calendar October 30, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce MA DOLORES SOTO CASTRO, Clerk Petitioner v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A091 286 821 Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ma Dolores Soto Castro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order dismissing her appeal and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order denying her applications for waiver of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Her * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 16-60618 Document: 00514217330 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/31/2017 No. 16-60618 sole argument on appeal is that the BIA and IJ erred in determining, in connection with her request for withholding of removal, that her claimed membership in a protected social group was limited to the group comprised of Americanized Mexican returnees and did not include a claim based on family ties. Soto Castro briefs no argument challenging the denial of her requests for a waiver of inadmissibility, adjustment of status, asylum, or relief under the CAT, and she has therefore abandoned any such challenge. See Sama v. Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585, 589 (5th Cir. 2012); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). She likewise does not dispute that her prior alien smuggling conviction is an aggravated felony or that she is removable based on that conviction. See Sama, 669 F.3d at 589; Soadjede, 324 F.3d at 833. Because Soto was removable as an aggravated felon, this court has jurisdiction to consider only constitutional claims or questions of law. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(a)(2)(C), (a)(2)(D); Marquez-Marquez v. Gonzales, 455 F.3d 548, 560-61 (5th Cir. 2006). Soto’s petition raises neither a legal nor constitutional question. We lack jurisdiction to consider her fact-based argument. See Siwe v. Holder, 742 F.3d 603, 613 (5th Cir. 2014); Arciniega v. Holder, 702 F.3d 781, 785 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 2 16-60618 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ca5 5th Cir. Ma Soto Castro v. Jefferson Sessions, III 31 October 2017 Immigration Unpublished c1f76c38753a8e20269828f07d07864dc58b658b
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals