Tchiengang v. Gonzales

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 27, 2005
• Docket: 04-1909
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1909

PATRICE KEPTCHUME TCHIENGANG,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A97-194-215)

Submitted: April 13, 2005 Decided: April 27, 2005

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua A. Moses, JOSHUA MOSES & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Blair T. O’Connor, Senior Litigation Counsel, Shahira M. Tadross, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Patrice Keptchume Tchiengang, a native and citizen of

Cameroon, petitions for review of a final order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming without opinion the

immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen removal

proceedings. This court’s review of the denial of a motion to

reopen is extremely deferential, and the decision will not be

reversed absent abuse of discretion. Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587,

595 (4th Cir. 1999). Motions to reopen are disfavored. INS v.

Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). We find no abuse of discretion

in the immigration judge’s conclusion that Tchiengang failed to

establish exceptional circumstances warranting reopening. See 8

U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(i), (e)(1) (2000). Accordingly, we 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

- 2 -