Filed: Apr. 22, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2037 JIN QING WANG, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: April 4, 2011 Decided: April 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward Giuliano, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Ass
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2037 JIN QING WANG, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: April 4, 2011 Decided: April 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward Giuliano, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2037
JIN QING WANG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: April 4, 2011 Decided: April 22, 2011
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward Giuliano, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West,
Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant
Director, Robbin K. Blaya, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Jin Qing Wang, a native and citizen of the People’s
Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board
of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen as
untimely. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and
find no abuse of discretion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c)(2)
(2010). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the
reasons stated by the Board. In re: Jin Qing Wang (B.I.A. Aug.
11, 2010). 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