NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 11 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OSCAR SANCHEZ-ORDAZ, No. 16-70147 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-736-873 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 3, 2020** Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.

Oscar Sanchez-Ordaz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Sanchez-Ordaz’s sole, unexhausted

* 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). contention that his conviction would be eligible for Federal First Offender Act treatment. See Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 2004) (“the exhaustion requirement applies to ‘streamlined’ cases”); Garcia-Cortez v. Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 749, 753 (9th Cir. 2004) (“The Notice of Appeal is sufficiently specific if the alien explains in a short and plain statement exactly how and why the IJ erred. . . . [C]onclusory or generalized statements that the IJ abused his discretion or wrongfully ordered the alien’s removal fail to meet the specificity requirement, because they do not meaningfully direct the BIA in its review.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

2 16-70147