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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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UNPUBLISHED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Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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