Flora Lopez v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 12-60970 (5th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 12-60970 Document: 00512532359 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 12-60970 Summary Calendar FILED February 13, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk FLORA LOPEZ, Petitioner v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A077 751 853 Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Flora Lopez petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) to deny her motion to reopen her immigration proceedings. Lopez, who is proceeding pro se, argues that that the IJ and BIA failed to consider whether she was eligible for discretionary relief based on two memorandums issued by the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement regarding the exercise 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-60970 Document: 00512532359 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2014 No. 12-60970 of prosecutorial discretion. However, when she was before the IJ and the BIA, Lopez did not raise this issue. Accordingly, she failed to exhaust it, and we lack jurisdiction to address it. See Omari v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 318-19 (5th Cir. 2009). Lopez does not challenge the BIA s reasons for denying relief, namely, that she failed to meet her burden to show that she did not receive notice of the immigration hearing and failed to establish that she acted diligently with regard to her immigration proceedings. Consequently, she has abandoned any challenge to the BIA s ruling. See Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS, 809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir. 1986). The petition for review is DISMISSED. 2

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.