Diaa Youssef v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A099-814-124 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999630122].. [14-2295]
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UNPUBLISHED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Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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?