Filed: Jan. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1823 ZIYAD BADER, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A45-227-362) Submitted: December 18, 2006 Decided: January 17, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ziyad Bader, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Lindsay L. Ch
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1823 ZIYAD BADER, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A45-227-362) Submitted: December 18, 2006 Decided: January 17, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ziyad Bader, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Lindsay L. Chi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1823 ZIYAD BADER, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A45-227-362) Submitted: December 18, 2006 Decided: January 17, 2007 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ziyad Bader, Petitioner Pro Se. James Arthur Hunolt, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Lindsay L. Chichester, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alien Ziyad Bader petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2006). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Bader, No. A45-227-362 (B.I.A. June 19, 2006). 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 -
