MEMORANDUM **
Eduardo Rodriguez-Mendiola, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order declining to remand and dismissing his appeal from an immigration judges (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
The BIA denied cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion and this court lacks jurisdiction to review such discretionary decisions. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); see also Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing the courts lack of jurisdiction to review a discretionary cancellation of removal determination and the related exception that the court retains jurisdiction to review “purely legal” questions).
In his opening brief, Rodriguez-Mendiola does not raise any challenge to the BIAs decision not to remand his removal proceedings to the IJ. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a partys opening brief are waived).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Rodriguez-Mendiolas contention that the IJ violated his right to due process. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (requiring exhaustion of procedural errors that could be corrected by the BIA).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.