Urrutia v. Gonzales

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 12, 2006
• Docket: 05-1662
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1662

JOSE ALEXANDER ORTIZ URRUTIA,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A41-712-565)

Submitted: February 24, 2006 Decided: April 12, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jay S. Marks, MARKS & KATZ, LLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Daniel E. Goldman, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Jose Alexander Ortiz Urrutia, a native and citizen of El

Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to reopen. 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 on the

ground that it was untimely filed. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)

(2005) (establishing a ninety-day time limitation for filing a

motion to reopen); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992)

(setting forth standard of review).*

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

* We find that Urrutia has failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds to invoke the doctrine of equitable tolling. See Harris v. Hutchinson, 209 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 2000).

- 2 -