Francisco Calderon Quintanill v. Jefferson Sessions , 695 F. App'x 296 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 15 2017
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    FRANCISCO ALEXANDER CALDERON                    No.    15-71724
    QUINTANILLA,
    Agency No. A200-158-229
    Petitioner,
    v.                                             MEMORANDUM*
    JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
    General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted August 9, 2017**
    Before:      SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Francisco Alexander Calderon Quintanilla, a native and citizen of El
    Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
    dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying a continuance,
    *
    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).
    and denying his motion to remand. We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    .
    We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a continuance. Sandoval-Luna v.
    Mukasey, 
    526 F.3d 1243
    , 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
    The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Calderon Quintanilla’s
    motion for a continuance where he failed to show eligibility for any relief, and it
    was undisputed that he was ineligible for status adjustment. See 
    Id. at 1247
     (no
    abuse of discretion where no relief was immediately available to the petitioner); 8
    C.F.R § 1003.29 (IJ has authority to grant continuance upon showing of good
    cause).
    Calderon Quintanilla failed to raise, and has therefore waived, any challenge
    to the BIA’s denial of his motion to remand. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 
    94 F.3d 1256
    , 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (“an issue referred to in the appellant’s statement of the
    case but not discussed in the body of the opening brief is deemed waived.”).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                    15-71724
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-71724

Citation Numbers: 695 F. App'x 296

Judges: Schroeder, Tashima, Smith

Filed Date: 8/15/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024