Filed: Sep. 04, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1099 BABATUNDE BIODUN OTUBANJO, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: August 26, 2008 Decided: September 4, 2008 Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irena I. Karpinski, LAW OFFICES OF IRENA I. KARPINSKI, Washington, D.C.,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1099 BABATUNDE BIODUN OTUBANJO, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: August 26, 2008 Decided: September 4, 2008 Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irena I. Karpinski, LAW OFFICES OF IRENA I. KARPINSKI, Washington, D.C., ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1099
BABATUNDE BIODUN OTUBANJO,
Petitioner,
v.
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: August 26, 2008 Decided: September 4, 2008
Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Irena I. Karpinski, LAW OFFICES OF IRENA I. KARPINSKI, Washington,
D.C., for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney
General, Francis Fraser, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jason Xavier
Hamilton, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for
Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Babatunde Biodun Otubanjo, a native and citizen of
Nigeria, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals adopting and affirming the decision of the Immigration
Judge denying his request for a continuance for adjudication of a
petition for alien relative. We have carefully reviewed the record
and conclude that the decision to deny a continuance was not an
abuse of discretion. See 8 C.F.R. ยง 1003.29 (2008); Onyeme v. INS,
146 F.3d 227, 231 (4th Cir. 1998). We accordingly 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