Monroy Clavijo v. Gonzales , 159 F. App'x 520 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1687
PEDRO JOSE MONROY CLAVIJO,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the
United States,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A79-745-825)
Submitted: November 23, 2005 Decided: December 27, 2005
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Howard T. Mei, Bethesda, Maryland, for Petitioner. Paul J.
McNulty, United States Attorney, Richard W. Sponseller, Assistant
United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Pedro Jose Monroy Clavijo petitions this court for review
of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming
the immigration judge’s ruling finding him removable and denying
asylum relief. The Board’s order was entered on May 20, 2005.
Monroy Clavijo’s petition for review was filed with this court on
June 22, 2005, thirty-two days later.
Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1) (2000), Monroy Clavijo
had thirty days from the date of the Board’s final order, or until
June 20, 2005, to file a timely petition for review. This time
period is “jurisdictional in nature and must be construed with
strict fidelity to [its] terms.” Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405
(1995). It is “not subject to equitable tolling.” Id. As Monroy
Clavijo’s petition for review was not timely filed, we lack
jurisdiction to review his claim.
Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review for lack
of jurisdiction. 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.
DISMISSED
- 2 -