Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Veranika Vanchuk v. Eric Holder, Jr., 12-1918 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 12-1918 Visitors: 30
Filed: Mar. 14, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1918 VERANIKA VANCHUK, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: March 5, 2013 Decided: March 14, 2013 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason A. Dzubow, DZUBOW & PILCHER, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Stuart F. Deler
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-1918 VERANIKA VANCHUK, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: March 5, 2013 Decided: March 14, 2013 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason A. Dzubow, DZUBOW & PILCHER, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, William C. Peachey, Assistant Director, Jem C. Sponzo, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Veranika Vanchuk, a native of the Soviet Union and a citizen of Belarus, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying her motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find no abuse of discretion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c) (2012). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. In re: Vanchuk (B.I.A. June 29, 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