William Reyes v. William Barr
This text of William Reyes v. William Barr (William Reyes v. William Barr) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1418
WILLIAM ANTONIO CLAROS REYES,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 18-1893
On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: March 1, 2019 Decided: April 19, 2019
Before NIEMEYER, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petitions denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian P. Casson, NORTHERN VIRGINIA IMMIGRATION LAW FIRM, PLLC, Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Leslie McKay, Senior Litigation Counsel, Christina P. Greer, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2 PER CURIAM:
William Antonio Claros Reyes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal
from the immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture and the Board’s subsequent order denying
reconsideration. With regard to Reyes’ asylum application, we lack jurisdiction to review
the agency’s determination that Reyes failed to demonstrate changed circumstances
excusing the untimeliness of his application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3) (2012). Reyes’
contention that he raises a reviewable constitutional claim or question of law, see
Zambrano v. Sessions, 878 F.3d 84, 87 (4th Cir. 2017), is without merit. Accordingly,
we dismiss the petitions for review as to this issue. For Reyes’ remaining claims, we
deny the petitions for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re Reyes (B.I.A.
March 15, 2018 & July 31, 2018). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
PETITIONS DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
William Reyes v. William Barr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-reyes-v-william-barr-ca4-2019.