Hundal

Hundal v. Holder

Good Law
422 F. App'x 576
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 201106-73776California754 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Navneet Hundal, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) Burbano affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision terminating her asylum status due to a fraudulent asylum application and denying her withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Hundal also petitions for review of the BIA’s denial of her motion to remand. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition.

As a threshold matter, we decline to review Hundal’s argument that the IJ abused her discretion in granting the government’s motion to reopen. The IJ granted the government’s motion to reopen on August 6, 2004. Hundal did not appeal that decision to the BIA. Although the BIA adopted and affirmed the IJ’s April 21, 2005 decision, pursuant to Matter of Burbano, that decision addressed only the issue of whether Hundal’s asylum application was fraudulent. Hundal thus failed to exhaust her administrative remedies as to the government’s motion to reopen. See Arreguin-Moreno v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 1229, 1232 (9th Cir.2008).

Where an IJ reopens removal proceedings for the purpose of terminating a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.