Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Anukwuem v. INS, 96-1645 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-1645 Visitors: 39
Filed: Nov. 18, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1645 UZOMA CHIDOZIE ANUKWUEM, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A71-033-474) Submitted: November 7, 1996 Decided: November 18, 1996 Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Uzoma Chidozie Anukwuem, Petitioner Pro Se. Richard
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1645 UZOMA CHIDOZIE ANUKWUEM, Petitioner, versus U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A71-033-474) Submitted: November 7, 1996 Decided: November 18, 1996 Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Uzoma Chidozie Anukwuem, Petitioner Pro Se. Richard Michael Evans, Michelle Arlene Gluck, Brenda Elaine Ellison, UNITED STATES DEPART- MENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision and order affirming the immigration judge's decision finding the Appellant deportable and denying his application for suspension of deportation. Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition upon the reasoning of the Board. Anukwuem v. INS, No. A71-033-474 (B.I.A. Apr. 1, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer