NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 10 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA SILVIA OPICO-ALFARO, No. 18-70761 Petitioner, Agency No. A213-081-892 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 6, 2020** Seattle, Washington Before: M. SMITH and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and TUNHEIM,*** District Judge. Maria Silvia Opico-Alfaro, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order dismissing her appeal. * 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). *** The Honorable John R. Tunheim, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation. The BIA found that Opico-Alfaro had waived her right to appeal and had not contested the validity of that waiver. This court lacks jurisdiction over the petition for review of the BIA’s dismissal of Opico-Alfaro’s appeal. Opico-Alfaro waived her right to appeal in removal proceedings before the immigration judge. She did not challenge the validity of that waiver in her appeal before BIA. The waiver of the right to appeal constitutes a failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Brown v. Holder, 763 F.3d 1141, 1146 (9th Cir. 2014); Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that the plain text of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) “specifically mandates that the exhaustion of administrative remedies is a prerequisite to our jurisdiction”). A petitioner may challenge the validity of the waiver before the BIA, In re Patino, 23 I. & N. Dec. 74, 76 (BIA 2001), but the failure to raise the issue likewise amounts to a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, Arsdi v. Holder, 659 F.3d 925, 928–29 (9th Cir. 2011). Because Opico-Alfaro waived her right to appeal and failed to raise the validity of the waiver before the BIA, she failed to exhaust administrative remedies, and we are without jurisdiction to hear the matter. The petition for review is DISMISSED. 2 18-70761 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Maria Opico-Alfaro v. William Barr 10 February 2020 Agency Unpublished b5453c1bcc96bf5c2d1714fd2b388e937f4c533b
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals