CARDENAS EUCEDA v. WHITAKER (2019)

Danersy Mireya Cardenas-Euceda, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying her motion to reopen her 2004 in absentia removal proceedings. The BIA found that the motion was untimely and that Cardenas-Euceda had failed to present sufficient evidence of changed country conditions in Honduras to exempt her from the 90-day limitation period for moving to reopen removal proceedings. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i)-(ii).

As the respondent correctly notes, Cardenas-Euceda fails to brief the district court’s timeless finding or its related finding that she did not present sufficient evidence of changed country conditions. By abandoning those issues, she has waived her challenge to the BIA’s denial of her motion to reopen. See Falek v. Gonzales, 475 F.3d 285, 291 n.5 (5th Cir. 2007); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003) (per curiam). Consequently, Cardenas-Euceda cannot show that the BIA abused its discretion. See Barrios-Cantarero v. Holder, 772 F.3d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 2014).

The petition for review is DENIED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.