Filed: Nov. 22, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1601 LI JUAN HUANG, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE; JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A73-032-530) Submitted: November 7, 2002 Decided: November 22, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sunit K. Joshi, WILSON, JOSHI & KUZMIN, L.L.P., New York, New
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1601 LI JUAN HUANG, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE; JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A73-032-530) Submitted: November 7, 2002 Decided: November 22, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sunit K. Joshi, WILSON, JOSHI & KUZMIN, L.L.P., New York, New Y..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1601
LI JUAN HUANG,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE;
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A73-032-530)
Submitted: November 7, 2002 Decided: November 22, 2002
Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sunit K. Joshi, WILSON, JOSHI & KUZMIN, L.L.P., New York, New York,
for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr., Assistant Attorney
General, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant Director, John C.
Cunningham, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration
Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Li Juan Huang, a native and citizen of the Republic of China,
appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) denial of her
motion to reopen asylum proceedings. Our review of the record
discloses the Board did not abuse its discretion denying the motion
to reopen. See INS v. Doherty,
502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992) (stating
standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of
the Board. See In re: Li Juan Huang, No. A73-032-530 (BIA May 6,
2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2