Flores v. Mukasey

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1017
MARIA LOURDES BARBARA FLORES, a/k/a Maria Lourdes Barbara
Fury,
Petitioner,
v.
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-1622
MARIA LOURDES BARBARA FLORES, a/k/a Maria Lourdes Barbara
Fury,
Petitioner,
v.
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: January 7, 2009 Decided: January 26, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petitions denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Jeremiah Johnson, REEVES & ASSOCIATES, APLC, San Francisco,
California, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant
Attorney General, Michelle Gorden Latour, Assistant Director,
Joseph A. O’Connell, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Maria Lourdes Barbara Flores, a native and citizen of
the Philippines, seeks review of orders of the Board of
Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her motions to reopen. We
have reviewed Flores’ arguments and find no abuse of discretion
in the Board’s decisions denying her motions to reopen. See 8
C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2008); Afanwi v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 788 (4th
Cir. 2008). To the extent Flores challenges the underlying
decision of the Immigration Judge that was previously affirmed
by the Board, those orders have already been reviewed by this
court and are otherwise not part of the instant consolidated
petitions for review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(2) (2006); Stone
v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405 (1995).
Accordingly, we deny in part and dismiss in part the
petitions 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.
PETITIONS DENIED IN PART
AND DISMISSED IN PART
3