Macias-Ramos

MEMORANDUM *

Tomas Miguel Macias-Ramos filed a petition for review with this court on February 8, 2000. The transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”) apply to this case because the final order of deportation was filed after October 30, 1996, and the case was pending before April 1, 1997. See Singh v. INS, 213 F.3d 1050 , 1051 n. 1 (9th Cir.2000). Under the transitional rules, the petition was untimely because it was not filed within 30 days of the November 30, 1999, decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) in petitioner’s case. See IIRIRA § 309(c)(4)(C) (“[T]he petition for judicial review must be filed not later than 30 days after the date of the final order of exclusion or deportation.”). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction and must dismiss the petition for review. See Haroutunian v. INS, 87 F.3d 374, 375 (9th Cir.1996) (“It is well-settled that the requirement of a *682 timely petition for review is mandatory and jurisdictional.”).

Macias-Ramos argues that his filing should not be deemed untimely because he did not actually learn of the BIA’s decision until after a second mailing of that decision on…

concurring.

I concur in all but the paragraph that suggests what the outcome should be on the merits. In my view, we should not comment on the merits when, as in this case, we lack jurisdiction.