Oseni v. Mukasey

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 28, 2008
Docket07-1654
StatusUnpublished

This text of Oseni v. Mukasey (Oseni v. Mukasey) 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
Oseni v. Mukasey, (4th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1654

ILESANMI MOHAMMED OSENI,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A76-127-134)

Submitted: March 19, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008

Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Fatai A. Suleman, AMITY, KUM & SULEMAN, P.A., Greenbelt, Maryland, for Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Song E. Park, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Ilesanmi Mohammed Oseni, a native and citizen of Nigeria,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.

We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order

and conclude the Board did not abuse its discretion. 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.2(a) (2007); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992);

Nibagwire v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 153, 156 (4th Cir. 2006).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated

by the Board. In Re: Oseni, No. A76-127-134 (B.I.A. June 18,

2007). We also deny Oseni’s motion for stay of removal as moot.

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 -

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

Related

Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Doherty
502 U.S. 314 (Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Oseni v. Mukasey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oseni-v-mukasey-ca4-2008.