Chang Kim v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 10 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHANG HOON KIM, a.k.a. Frank Chang No. 08-74508
Hoon Kim,
Agency No. A070-932-670
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 2, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Chang Hoon Kim, a native and citizen of South Korea, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252,
and we deny the petition for review.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We reject Kim’s contention that the government failed to establish
removability by clear and convincing evidence, because Kim conceded
removability. See Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1024 (9th Cir.
2008) (“[W]here the alien concedes removability, the government’s burden in this
regard is satisfied.” (citation and quotation omitted)).
Kim’s contention that the government should be equitably estopped from
ordering his removal is unavailing. See Sulit v. Schiltgen, 213 F.3d 449, 454 (9th
Cir. 2000) (“[E]stoppel against the government is unavailable where petitioners
have not lost any rights to which they were entitled.”); cf. Salgado-Diaz v.
Gonzalez, 395 F.3d 1158, 1165-68 (9th Cir. 2005).
Kim’s remaining contentions are not persuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-74508