Filed: Oct. 31, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2466 LUCY JENKAA BADOH, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A76-903-217) Submitted: August 22, 2005 Decided: October 31, 2005 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sopo Ngwa, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. K
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2466 LUCY JENKAA BADOH, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A76-903-217) Submitted: August 22, 2005 Decided: October 31, 2005 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sopo Ngwa, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Ke..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2466
LUCY JENKAA BADOH,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A76-903-217)
Submitted: August 22, 2005 Decided: October 31, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sopo Ngwa, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D.
Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright,
Assistant Director, Michele Y. F. Sarko, Office of Immigration
Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Lucy Jenkaa Badoh, a native and citizen of Cameroon,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. The order in question affirmed a ruling of the
immigration judge denying Badoh’s motion for reconsideration of the
denial of her motion to reopen. We have reviewed the
administrative record and the Board’s order and find that the Board
did not abuse its discretion in affirming the immigration judge’s
decision. See INS v. Doherty,
502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -