Hui Fang Dong v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing 920091006

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1894 HUI FANG DONG, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: September 25, 2009 Decided: October 6, 2009 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition dismissed in part and denied in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruno Joseph Bembi, Hempstead, New York, for Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Andrew B. Insenga, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Hui Fang Dong, a native and citizen of China, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming the Immigration Judge's (IJ) denial of relief from removal. Dong first challenges the denial of asylum. Because the Board found that Dong's asylum application was untimely and that no exceptions applied to excuse the untimeliness, we find that we are without jurisdiction to review this claim. Gomis v. Holder, 571 F.3d 353, 358-59 (4th Cir. See 2009). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review in part with respect to this claim. We have reviewed Dong's remaining claims regarding the denial of withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture, and conclude that they are without merit. We therefore deny the petition for review with respect See In re: to these claims for the reasons stated by the Board. Dong (B.I.A. Aug. 16, 2007). discretion in the Board's Finally, we find no abuse of declining to reopen and decision remand this matter to the IJ. We accordingly dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. facts and legal We dispense with oral argument because the are adequately presented in the contentions 2 materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?