Deku v. Ashcroft ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1875
BLEMA DEKU,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A72-379-761)
Submitted: May 19, 2004 Decided: June 9, 2004
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Allan Ebert, LAW OFFICES OF ALLAN EBERT, Washington, D.C., for
Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S.
Wendtland, Assistant Director, Danielle Franco, Office of
Immigration Litigation, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Blema Deku, a native and citizen of Togo, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)
denying her motion to reopen deportation proceedings. We have
reviewed the record and the BIA’s order and find that the BIA did
not abuse its discretion in denying Deku’s motion to reopen. See
8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2003); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24
(1992). Moreover, despite Deku’s urgings, we do not have
jurisdiction to review the BIA’s order affirming without opinion
the immigration judge’s decision denying Deku’s applications for
asylum and withholding from removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(6)
(2000); Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 394, 405 (1995).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the BIA’s
reasoning. See In re: Deku, No. A72-379-761 (BIA June 30, 2003).
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 -