KLEIDER CARRETO-DIAZ V. WILLIAM BARR, No. 15-71834 (9th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 23 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KLEIDER IVAN CARRETO-DIAZ, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 15-71834 Agency No. A205-378-222 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 7, 2019** Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges. Kleider Ivan Carreto-Diaz, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing Carreto-Diaz’s appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying Carreto-Diaz’s application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the * 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). Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. In his petition for review, Carreto-Diaz does not challenge the BIA’s determination that the harm he suffered in Guatemala does not rise to the level of persecution, that the social groups he presented to the agency are not cognizable, and that he otherwise failed to establish a nexus between either the harm he suffered or the harm he fears and a protected ground. Thus, he has waived any argument based thereon. 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). This court lacks jurisdiction to review Carreto-Diaz’s unexhausted claim based on his status as a young male returning to Guatemala after a long residence in the United States. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677–78 (9th Cir. 2004). Thus, Carreto-Diaz’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. Carreto-Diaz does not challenge in his petition for review the BIA’s denial of his CAT claim and thus has waived the issue. See Martinez-Serrano, 94 F.3d at 1259–60. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 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.
