Fernando Alameda-Rodriguez v. Loretta Lynch


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [15-60703 Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction] Judge: FPB , Judge: JLD , Judge: ECP [15-60703]

Download PDF
Case: 15-60703 Document: 00513934311 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 15-60703 Summary Calendar FERNANDO Rodriguez, ALAMEDA-RODRIGUEZ, also March 31, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk known as Fernando A. Petitioner v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A084 817 063 Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Fernando Alameda-Rodriguez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA’s) decision denying his application pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b) for cancellation of removal on discretionary hardship grounds. Alameda-Rodriguez argues that the immigration judge, and in turn the BIA, erred in failing to consider the hardship that both of his children 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 15-60703 Document: 00513934311 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2017 No. 15-60703 would suffer if he were removed from the United States. He contends that the hardship of his son was not considered at all. However, he did not raise this claim before the BIA. Accordingly, Alameda-Rodriguez failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and the claim is not considered. See Wang v. Ashcroft, 260 F.3d 448, 452-53 (5th Cir. 2001). Because we lack jurisdiction to review unexhausted claims, see Townsend v. INS, 799 F.2d 179, 181 (5th Cir. 1986), the petition is dismissed. DISMISSED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?