Yilin Zhang v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 09-71669 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOV 02 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT YILIN ZHANG, No. 09-71669 Petitioner, Agency No. A097-867-607 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. Yilin Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). under 8 U.S.C. ยง 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency s factual findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. We lack jurisdiction to review Zhang s claim that the transcript of the hearing testimony was incomplete because he failed to raise the argument before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (no jurisdiction over legal claims not presented in administrative proceedings below). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition with respect to that claim. Zhang failed to raise any substantive challenge to the BIA s denial of his claims for relief in his opening brief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party s opening brief are waived). Accordingly, we deny the petition as to his asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims. PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part. 2 09-71669

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.