Yared Abebe v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A088-259-228. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998920643].. [12-1229]

Appeal: 12-1229

Doc: 20

Filed: 08/21/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1229

YARED ASSEFA ABEBE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.

Submitted:

July 26, 2012

Before KING and
Circuit Judge.

DIAZ,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

August 21, 2012

HAMILTON,

Senior

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Garfield, GARFIELD LAW GROUP, LLP, Washington, D.C., for
Petitioner.
Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney
General, Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Kristen Giuffreda
Chapman,
Office
of
Immigration
Litigation,
UNITED
STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-1229

Doc: 20

Filed: 08/21/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Yared Assefa Abebe, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion for reconsideration.

We

deny the petition for review.
A motion to reconsider must specify the errors of law
or

fact

in

the

§ 1229a(c)(6)(c)

Board’s

(2006);

8

prior
C.F.R.

decision.
§ 1003.2(b)

See

8

(2012).

U.S.C.
This

court reviews the denial of a motion for reconsideration for
abuse of discretion.

Narine v. Holder, 559 F.3d 246, 249 (4th

Cir. 2009); Jean v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 475, 481 (4th Cir. 2006).
The

court

will

reverse

the

Board’s

decision

arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law.
249.

only

if

it

is

Narine, 559 F.3d at

“[A]dministrative findings of fact are conclusive unless

any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the
contrary.”

8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2006).
We conclude there was no abuse of discretion.

failed
despite

to

raise

the

specific

§ 1003.3(b) (2012).

factual

issues

instructions

to

on
do

Abebe

appeal

to

the

Board,

so.

See

8

C.F.R.

The Board did not abuse its discretion by

finding that Abebe could not use a motion to reconsider to alert
the Board to his contentions regarding the immigration judge’s
factual findings that supported the adverse credibility finding
when he did not raise those arguments on appeal.
2

Appeal: 12-1229

Doc: 20

Filed: 08/21/2012

Accordingly,
dispense

with

oral

we

Pg: 3 of 3

deny

argument

the

petition

because

the

for
facts

review.
and

We
legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

3