Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Halima Beshir v. Eric Holder, Jr., 12-1665 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 12-1665 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 08, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1665 HALIMA ABADURA BESHIR, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: December 11, 2012 Decided: January 8, 2013 Before DIAZ, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Goren, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID GOREN, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Acting A
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1665 HALIMA ABADURA BESHIR, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: December 11, 2012 Decided: January 8, 2013 Before DIAZ, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Goren, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID GOREN, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, Kerry A. Monaco, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Halima Abadura Beshir, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s decision finding Beshir ineligible for adjustment of status as an alien who knowingly made a frivolous application for asylum. Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the preponderance of the evidence supports the agency’s finding that Beshir filed a frivolous asylum application. See Matter of Y-L-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 151, 157 (B.I.A. 2007). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re Beshir, (B.I.A. Apr. 26, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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