AHMED v. WILKINSON (2021)

[Unpublished]

Abdirahman Dayib Ahmed, a native and citizen of Somalia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which upheld an immigration judge's denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), after the BIA reversed the immigration judge's grant of cancellation of removal and remanded for further proceedings. After careful review, we conclude that Ahmed waived any challenge to the denial of asylum, withholding, or CAT relief because he failed to advance any argument that the agency erred in denying such relief. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004). We further conclude that Ahmed failed to fully administratively exhaust the issues raised in his brief, and we therefore do not reach those arguments. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Lasu v. Barr, 970 F.3d 960, 964-65 (8th Cir. 2020); Frango v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir. 2006). In any event, we lack jurisdiction to review a challenge to his arrest, see Bah v. Cangemi, 548 F.3d 680, 683 n.3 (8th Cir. 2008), and his remaining arguments are either foreclosed by this court's precedent, Ali v. Barr, 924 F.3d 983, 985-86 (8th Cir. 2019), or not supported by the record. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review.

PER CURIAM.