Almanza v. Whitaker, 120518 FED9, 14-70091

Docket Nº:14-70091
Party Name:RUBEN ORTEGA ALMANZA, Petitioner, v. MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent.
Judge Panel:Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:December 05, 2018
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

RUBEN ORTEGA ALMANZA, Petitioner,

v.

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-70091

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

December 5, 2018

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted November 27, 2018 [**]

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Judge Agency No. A079-580-870

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM [*]

Ruben Ortega Almanza, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an immigration judge's ("IJ") determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that he did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Mexico and thus is not entitled to relief from his reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Cruz Rendon v. Holder, 603 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

We reject as unsupported by the record Almanza's contentions that the IJ violated his due process rights by failing to provide a reasoned explanation for her decision. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim). We also reject Almanza's contention that the IJ failed to consider his arguments. See Larita-Martinez v. INS, 220 F.3d 1092, 1095-96 (9th Cir. 2000).

In his opening brief, Almanza fails to challenge the IJ's determination that he did not have a reasonable fear of persecution on account of a protected ground or torture in Mexico. Thus, Almanza has waived any such challenge...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP