Diaa Youssef v. Eric Holder, Jr.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A099-814-124 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999630122].. [14-2295]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-2295 Doc: 26 Filed: 07/29/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-2295 DIAA SAMIR YOUSSEF, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: July 16, 2015 Decided: July 29, 2015 Before MOTZ, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeremy L. McKinney, MCKINNEY IMMIGRATION LAW, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Terri J. Scadron, Assistant Director, Manuel A. Palau, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-2295 Doc: 26 Filed: 07/29/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Diaa Samir Youssef, a native and citizen of Egypt, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying his application for adjustment of status as a matter of discretion. We deny the petition for review. When the Board adopts and affirms the IJ’s decision, as in this case, and supplements it with its own opinion, we review both decisions. 2014). or Cordova v. Holder, 759 F.3d 332, 337 (4th Cir. We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary grant denial of an adjustment § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) (2012). of status. See 8 U.S.C. However, we retain jurisdiction to review constitutional claims and questions of law. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2012). Insofar as Youssef claims that the IJ erred as a matter of law by considering the bona fides of his marriage, we conclude there was no error. When deciding an application for adjustment of status, the IJ may consider equities in the applicant’s favor and adverse factors. 495–96 (B.I.A. 1970). See Matter of Arai, 13 I. & N. Dec. 494, Thus, the IJ did not err in considering favorable and adverse factors concerning the bona fides of his marriage. 2002). See Agyeman v. INS, 296 F.3d 871, 879 n.2 (9th Cir. We further conclude that the Board specifically disposed 2 Appeal: 14-2295 Doc: 26 Filed: 07/29/2015 Pg: 3 of 3 of Youssef’s claim that he was denied due process and a fair hearing. (J.A. at 5). To the extent that Youssef challenges the discretionary denial of adjustment of status, we are without jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i). Accordingly, we petition for review. facts and materials legal before deny in part and dismiss in part the We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED 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?