Filed: Oct. 04, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2061 TOMAS CABRERA, Petitioner, versus PETER D. KEISLER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A90-682-311) Submitted: July 20, 2007 Decided: October 4, 2007 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aroon Roy Padharia, LAW OFFICE OF AROON R. PADHARIA, Washington, D.C.,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2061 TOMAS CABRERA, Petitioner, versus PETER D. KEISLER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A90-682-311) Submitted: July 20, 2007 Decided: October 4, 2007 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aroon Roy Padharia, LAW OFFICE OF AROON R. PADHARIA, Washington, D.C., f..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-2061
TOMAS CABRERA,
Petitioner,
versus
PETER D. KEISLER, Acting Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A90-682-311)
Submitted: July 20, 2007 Decided: October 4, 2007
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aroon Roy Padharia, LAW OFFICE OF AROON R. PADHARIA, Washington,
D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney
General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Jonathan
Robbins, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tomas Cabrera, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) affirming the decision of the immigration judge
denying a motion to reconsider a final order of removal. We have
reviewed the administrative record and find no abuse of discretion
in the Board’s affirmance of the immigration judge’s order. See 8
C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(2) (2007); Jean v. Gonzales,
435 F.3d 475, 481,
482-83 (4th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we deny the petition for
review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In Re: Cabrera,
No. A90-682-311 (B.I.A. Sept. 12, 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 -