Filed: Nov. 13, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1042 ABALO MAWAKI ALITI, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A97-205-041) Submitted: October 18, 2006 Decided: November 13, 2006 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James A. Roberts, Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant At
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1042 ABALO MAWAKI ALITI, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A97-205-041) Submitted: October 18, 2006 Decided: November 13, 2006 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James A. Roberts, Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Att..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1042
ABALO MAWAKI ALITI,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A97-205-041)
Submitted: October 18, 2006 Decided: November 13, 2006
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James A. Roberts, Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D.
Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright,
Assistant Director, Daniel E. Goldman, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Abalo Mawaki Aliti, a native and citizen of Togo,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reconsider its prior order,
which adopted and affirmed the immigration judge’s denial of his
requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
the Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the record and
find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the
motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2006); Jean v.
Gonzales,
435 F.3d 475, 481 (4th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we 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 -