Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Adin LINARES-GONZALEZ; Sindy Aguilar-Delinares, aka Sindy Aguilar De Linares, Petitioners, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-73814

Decided: August 26, 2020

Before: TROTT, SILVERMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Adin Linares-Gonzalez, Pro Se Sindy Aguilar-Delinares, Pro Se Lindsay Corliss, Stefanie A. Svoren-Jay, Trial Attorney, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent


Adin Linares-Gonzalez and Sindy Aguilar-Delinares, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Petitioners do not adequately challenge in their opening brief the BIA's denial of their motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel and based on a material change in country conditions. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party's opening brief are waived). Petitioners also do not challenge the BIA's denial of their request to reopen pursuant to its sua sponte authority, or the BIA's denial of their request for voluntary departure. Id. Thus, these issues are waived.

We lack jurisdiction to review petitioners’ only specific contention that their proceedings should be reopened so that they can seek prosecutorial discretion. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (order).


Copied to clipboard