Soi v. Ashcroft ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1424
CAROLINE CHEBET SOI,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General for the United
States,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A76-596-913)
Submitted: September 20, 2004 Decided: October 12, 2004
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Sean D. Hummel, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D.
Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Margaret J. Perry, Senior
Litigation Counsel, Stephen J. Flynn, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Caroline Chebet Soi, a native and citizen of Kenya,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”)
order affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her motion
to reopen.
We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of
discretion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2004); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S.
314, 323-24 (1992); Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587, 595 (4th Cir.
1999). The denial of a motion to reopen must be reviewed with
extreme deference, since immigration statutes do not contemplate
reopening and the applicable regulations disfavor motions to
reopen. M.A. v. INS, 899 F.2d 304, 308 (4th Cir. 1990) (en banc).
We have reviewed the administrative record, the Board’s order, and
the IJ’s decision and find no abuse of discretion.
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 -