Eding v. Gonzales

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: May 2, 2005
• Docket: 04-1997
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1997

PAULE NADEGE MBONJI EDING; ASTRID EDING,

Petitioners,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A95-218-876; A95-225-199)

Submitted: April 20, 2005 Decided: May 2, 2005

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua A. Moses, JOSHUA MOSES & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioners. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Michele Y. F. Sarko, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Sisters Paule Nadege Mbonji Eding and Astrid Eding,

natives and citizens of Cameroon, petition for review of an order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying their motion to

reopen its previous order affirming the immigration judge’s denial

of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the

Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the record and the

Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion

in denying the Edings’ motion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2004).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning of

the Board. See In re: Eding, No. A95-218-876; No. A95-225-199

(B.I.A. July 15, 2004). 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 -