Filed: Aug. 05, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2296 DEMIN JIANG, a/k/a De Min Jiang, a/k/a De Ming Jiang, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: July 19, 2011 Decided: August 5, 2011 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Brown, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Carl
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2296 DEMIN JIANG, a/k/a De Min Jiang, a/k/a De Ming Jiang, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: July 19, 2011 Decided: August 5, 2011 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Brown, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Carl H..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2296
DEMIN JIANG, a/k/a De Min Jiang, a/k/a De Ming Jiang,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR.,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: July 19, 2011 Decided: August 5, 2011
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Brown, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West,
Assistant Attorney General, Carl H. McIntyre, Jr., Assistant
Director, Dawn S. Conrad, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Demin Jiang, a native and citizen of China, petitions
for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(Board) denying his motion to reopen as untimely and numerically
barred. We have reviewed the administrative record and find no
abuse of discretion in the denial of relief on Jiang’s motion.
See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c) (2011). We accordingly deny the
petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In
re: Jiang, (B.I.A. Oct. 26, 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