Filed: May 16, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1973 HAO XIANG LIU, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-319-009) Submitted: April 24, 2006 Decided: May 16, 2006 Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Howard T. Mei, LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD T. MEI, Bethesda, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Ass
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1973 HAO XIANG LIU, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-319-009) Submitted: April 24, 2006 Decided: May 16, 2006 Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Howard T. Mei, LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD T. MEI, Bethesda, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1973 HAO XIANG LIU, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-319-009) Submitted: April 24, 2006 Decided: May 16, 2006 Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Howard T. Mei, LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD T. MEI, Bethesda, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Diane Kelleher, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Hao Xiang Liu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) summarily dismissing his appeal. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In Re: Liu, No. A79-319-009 (B.I.A. Aug. 8, 2005). 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 -
