Garcia
Garcia v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
The facts and procedural history are known to the parties and repeated here only as necessary. The parties ask us to address several issues: the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of Petitioners’ motion to reopen, the BIA’s denial of Petitioners’ application for cancellation of removal, the Legalization Appeals Unit’s (“LAU”) denial of Petitioner Sergio De La Torre Garcia’s Special Agricultural Worker (“SAW”) application as untimely, and the INS Legalization Director’s denial of Petitioner Sergio De La Torre Garcia’s SAW application. We address each in turn and deny the petition with respect to each claim.
We have repeatedly held that “the brief of the appellant must contain ‘the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor’;” arguments not contained in the brief are deemed waived. United States v. Loya, 807 F.2d 1483, 1486-87 (9th Cir. 1987) (quoting FED. R. APP. P. 28); see also United States v. Williamson, 439 F.3d 1125, 1138 (9th Cir.2006); Chebehoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1045 (9th Cir.2001); Bazuaye v. INS, 79 F.3d 118, 120 (9th Cir.1996) (per curiam); Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628, 634 (9th Cir.1988).…