RUBEN ORTEGA ALMANZA V. MATTHEW WHITAKER, No. 14-70091 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 5 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RUBEN ORTEGA ALMANZA, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 14-70091 Agency No. A079-580-870 v. MEMORANDUM* MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Judge Submitted November 27, 2018** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. 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 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 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. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in the opening brief). The motion of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project for leave to file an amici curiae brief out of time (Docket Entry No. 30) is denied. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 14-70091
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.
