United States v. Mateo Mendez-Zuniga

465 F. App'x 349

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Mateo Mendez-Zuniga appeals his conviction for illegal reentry. He presents an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v. Lopez-Ortiz, 313 F.3d 225, 229-31 (5th Cir.2002), which held that an immigration judge’s failure to explain the availability of discretionary relief in an immigration proceeding does not render the proceeding fundamentally unfair. See id.; see also Romero-Rodriguez v. Gonzales, 488 F.3d 672, 677 n. 5 (5th Cir.2007). The Government’s motion for summary af-firmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.