Elia Adolfina Leyton-arauz, Aka: Carmen Blandon Arauz, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 51 F.3d 280 (9th Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 51 F.3d 280 (9th Cir. 1995) Submitted March 21, 1995. *Decided April 4, 1995

Before: SNEED, POOLE and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Elia Adolfina Leyton-Arauz, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") dismissal as untimely of her appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying her applications for asylum and withholding of deportation. We deny the petition for review.

The government contends that because Leyton-Arauz has failed to raise any issues regarding the BIA's dismissal in her opening brief, she has waived the right to challenge the BIA's decision. This contention has merit.

"It is well established in this Circuit that claims which are not addressed in the appellant's brief are deemed abandoned." Collins v. City of San Diego, 841 F.2d 337, 339 (9th Cir. 1988); accord Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS, 809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir. 1986). Here, Leyton-Arauz has failed to raise in her opening brief any issues regarding the propriety of the BIA's dismissal of her appeal as untimely. Moreover, she has made no reply in this court to the government's waiver argument. We therefore conclude that Leyton-Arauz has waived her right to challenge the BIA's dismissal of her appeal as untimely. See Collins, 844 F.2d at 339.

In addition, "this court's review is limited to the decision of the BIA." Elnager v. INS, 930 F.2d 784, 787 (9th Cir. 1991). Thus, we decline to consider Leyton-Arauz's direct challenge to the IJ's decision. See id.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4.

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.