Femi v. Gonzales

235 F. App'x 146
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedAugust 13, 2007
Docket06-1585
StatusUnpublished

This text of 235 F. App'x 146 (Femi v. Gonzales) 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
Femi v. Gonzales, 235 F. App'x 146 (4th Cir. 2007).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Sanya Femi, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen. Femi claims reopening was warranted because he received insufficient instructions and notice by the immigration judge.

Our review of the Board’s denial of a motion to reopen is extremely deferential, since immigration statutes do not contemplate reopening and the applicable regulations disfavor these motions. Barry v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 741, 744-45 (4th Cir.2006), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1147, 166 L.Ed.2d 997 (2007). This Court will reverse the Board’s denial of a motion to reopen only if it is “arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law.” Id. at 745.

We find no abuse of discretion in the Board’s affirmation of the immigration judge’s denial of Femi’s motion to reopen based on his defective application. We therefore deny the petition for review. 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.

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

Related

Cohen v. United States
127 S. Ct. 1169 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Smith v. Nicholson
127 S. Ct. 1147 (Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
235 F. App'x 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/femi-v-gonzales-ca4-2007.