Filed: Apr. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1932 MOHAMMAD SWAILEM AWAD, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: April 20, 2015 Decided: April 30, 2015 Before GREGORY and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. W. Rob Heroy, GOODMAN, CARR PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Petitioner. Joyce R
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1932 MOHAMMAD SWAILEM AWAD, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: April 20, 2015 Decided: April 30, 2015 Before GREGORY and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. W. Rob Heroy, GOODMAN, CARR PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Petitioner. Joyce R...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1932
MOHAMMAD SWAILEM AWAD,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: April 20, 2015 Decided: April 30, 2015
Before GREGORY and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
W. Rob Heroy, GOODMAN, CARR PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Petitioner. Joyce R. Branda, Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Keith I. McManus, Senior Litigation Counsel, Matt A. Crapo,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for
Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mohammad Swailem Awad, a native and citizen of Jordan,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (Board) denying his motion to reconsider its affirmance
of the Immigration Judge’s decision denying Awad’s application
for adjustment of status as a matter of discretion. We have
reviewed the administrative record and Awad’s claim that the
agency exceeded its authority by improperly questioning him
about his marriage, and find his claim to be without merit. * We
accordingly find no abuse of discretion in the denial of
reconsideration, see Narine v. Holder,
559 F.3d 246, 249 (4th
Cir. 2009), and deny the petition for review for the reasons
stated by the Board. See In re: Awad (B.I.A. Aug. 12, 2014).
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
*
While we normally lack jurisdiction to review the
discretionary denial of adjustment of status, see 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(a)(2)(B) (2012), we retain jurisdiction here because Awad
has raised a question of law in his petition for review. See 8
U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2012).
2