Felix

Felix v. Mukasey

Good Law
279 F. App'x 463
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 16, 2008Nos. 05-35669, 05-77446, 07-71470California967 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*464 MEMORANDUM *

Petition for Review No. 05-35669

Silvia Felix appeals the district court’s dismissal of her habeas petition. Pursuant to Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir.2005), we construed the appeal as a petition for review from the agency’s decision, which means “we now review the BIA’s decision, not the district court’s orders.” Because Felix did not appeal the Immigration Judge’s 1998 removal order to the Board of Immigration Appeals, however, we are left to review the IJ’s removal order itself.

The Immigration and Nationality Act contains a “statutorily-mandated administrative exhaustion requirement,” which limits this court’s power to review removal orders to those for which “the alien has exhausted all administrative remedies available to the alien as of right.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (d)(1); Puga v. Chertoff 488 F.3d 812 , 814-15 (9th Cir.2007). “We have held that ‘failure to raise an issue in an appeal to the BIA constitutes a failure to exhaust remedies with respect to that question and deprives this court of jurisdiction to hear the matter.’ ” Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th Cir.2004) (brackets omitted). This exhaustion requirement…

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.