
    Jorge Vincente PALOMINO-AGREDA, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-71353.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 17, 2008.
    
    Filed Dec. 26, 2008.
    Sara M. MeVicker, Esquire, Salgado & Associates, PLLC, Luis F. Salgado, Esquire, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.
    Janet A. Bradley, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAC-Distriet Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: WALLACE, TROTT, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jorge Vincente Palomino-Agreda, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary denial of PalominoAgreda’s application for adjustment of status. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)©; Bazua-Cota v. Gonzales, 466 F.3d 747, 748 (9th Cir.2006) (per curiam).

We also lack jurisdiction to consider Palomino-Agreda’s remaining contentions because he failed to exhaust them before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     