
    Gabriel CELIS-ARAMBULA, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 11-73191.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 11, 2013 
    
    Filed Feb. 14, 2013.
    Gabriel Celis-Arambula, Las Vegas, NV, pro se.
    Dalin Riley Holyoak, Esquire, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral-argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gabriel Celis-Arambula, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Celis-Arambula’s contention that the IJ was partial and violated his right to due process because he did not raise that issue before the BIA, and thereby failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Abebe v. Mukasey, 554 F.3d 1203, 1208 (9th Cir.2009) (en banc) (issues not argued in a petitioner’s BIA appeal brief have not been exhausted, and the court lacks jurisdiction to consider them); see also Agyeman v. INS, 296 F.3d 871, 877 (9th Cir.2002) (this court may not entertain due process claims based on correctable procedural errors unless an alien first gives the BIA an opportunity to address them).

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