'by petitioners who appeal to the BIA instead of petitioning directly to this court should be minimal in future cases.” Ayala, 855 F.3d at 1019. As we noted in Ayala, “the BIA would be well advised to institute a process for quickly dismissing such appeals” and could avoid confusing aliens by ensuring their communications are clear, consistent, and accurate. Id. In the circumstances faced by Martinez, however, we find 'that the final administrative order was the BIA’s dismissal. Martinez, therefore, timely filed his petition for review with this court, and we have jurisdiction. b; The government does not offer , any argument on the merits of this petition; therefore, it has waived any challenge to the arguments Martinez raised. See Clem v. Lomeli, 566 F.3d 1177, 1182 (9th Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>). On remand, the agency is directed: (1) to
holding that argument not raised in opening brief is waived holding that an appellee who did not address an argument in the answering brief had waived that issue holding an argument made in plaintiffs reply brief but not in their opening brief waived holding an argument not raised in opening brief is waived holding that the petitioners failure to address an issue in the argument portion of his opening brief waived the issue