Cortez v. Holder

Fourth Circuit

Cortez v. Holder

515 F. App'x 199

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 28, 2013

DocketNo. 12-1854

StatusPublished

This text of 515 F. App'x 199 (Cortez v. Holder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cortez v. Holder, 515 F. App'x 199 (4th Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Olivia Buksh Cortez, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing Cortez’ appeal from the immigration judge’s removal order and the denial of Cortez’ motion to terminate proceedings. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Cortez (B.I.A. June 14, 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Olivia Buksh Cortez, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing Cortez’ appeal from the immigration judge’s removal order and the denial of Cortez’ motion to terminate proceedings. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Cortez (B.I.A. June 14, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

515 F. App'x 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortez-v-holder-ca4-2013.