Filed: Aug. 29, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1366 JIANBIN ZHANG, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A97-635-244) Submitted: August 18, 2006 Decided: August 29, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jianbin Zhang, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, Kristin Kay Edison, UNITED STATES DEPAR
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1366 JIANBIN ZHANG, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A97-635-244) Submitted: August 18, 2006 Decided: August 29, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jianbin Zhang, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, Kristin Kay Edison, UNITED STATES DEPART..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1366
JIANBIN ZHANG,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A97-635-244)
Submitted: August 18, 2006 Decided: August 29, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jianbin Zhang, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, Kristin Kay
Edison, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Jianbin Zhang, a native and citizen of China, petitions
for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(“Board”) denying his motion to reconsider its prior order, which
adopted and affirmed the immigration judge’s denial of his request
for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the record and the
Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion
in denying the motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a)
(2005); Jean v. Gonzales,
435 F.3d 475, 481 (4th Cir. 2006).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated
by the Board. See In re: Zhang, No. A97-635-244 (B.I.A. Feb. 27,
2006). 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 -