Filed: Sep. 02, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1089 SANTOS CRUZ LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A70-294-398) Submitted: August 12, 2003 Decided: September 2, 2003 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul S. Haar, Pauline M. Schwartz, LAW OFFICES OF PAUL S. HAAR, Washington, D.C., for Petiti
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1089 SANTOS CRUZ LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A70-294-398) Submitted: August 12, 2003 Decided: September 2, 2003 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul S. Haar, Pauline M. Schwartz, LAW OFFICES OF PAUL S. HAAR, Washington, D.C., for Petitio..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1089
SANTOS CRUZ LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A70-294-398)
Submitted: August 12, 2003 Decided: September 2, 2003
Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul S. Haar, Pauline M. Schwartz, LAW OFFICES OF PAUL S. HAAR,
Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, Richard M. Evans, Assistant Director,
Joan E. Smiley, Office of Immigration Litigation, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Santos Cruz Lopez-Hernandez, a native and citizen of El
Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen
deportation proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the
Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion
in denying Lopez-Hernandez’s motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(a) (2003); INS v. Doherty,
502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning of
the Board. See In re: Lopez-Hernandez, No. A70-294-398 (B.I.A.
Dec. 17, 2002). 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