Miiro v. Gonzales

Fourth Circuit

Miiro v. Gonzales

157 F. App'x 610

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 6, 2005·No. No. 05-1430·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Andrew Miiro, a native and citizen of Uganda, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying as untimely his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Miiro, No. A74-642-948 (B.I.A. Mar. 24, 2005). 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

PER CURIAM:

Andrew Miiro, a native and citizen of Uganda, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying as untimely his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Miiro, No. A74-642-948 (B.I.A. Mar. 24, 2005). 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

Miiro v. Gonzales, 157 F. App'x 610 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

157 F. App'x 610 (Miiro v. Gonzales) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related