Maritza Barriga-Vega v. Loretta Lynch
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A200-196-314, A200-196-317, A200-196-319, A200-196-320, A200-196-321 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999727217]. [15-1567]
Appeal: 15-1567
Doc: 20
Filed: 12/30/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-1567
MARITZA ISABEL BARRIGA-VEGA;
MARTINEZ;
HARLEY
SEBASTIAN
VELASQUEZ-BARRIGA; G.V.,
RAFAEL ARTURO VELASQUEZVELASQUEZ-BARRIGA;
ANGIE
Petitioners,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted:
November 17, 2015
Before DUNCAN
Circuit Judge.
and
DIAZ,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
December 30, 2015
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per
curiam opinion.
Daniel Christmann, CHRISTMANN LEGAL IMMIGRATION LAW, Charlotte,
North Carolina, for Petitioner.
Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal
Deputy Assistant
Attorney
General,
Justin
Markel,
Senior
Litigation Counsel, Benjamin J. Zeitlin, Office of Immigration
Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-1567
Doc: 20
Filed: 12/30/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Rafael Arturo Velasquez-Martinez, his wife, Maritza Isabel
Barriga-Vega, and their three children, natives and citizens of
Colombia,
petition
Immigration
Appeals
for
review
(Board)
of
an
order
dismissing
of
their
the
Board
from
appeal
of
the
immigration judge’s denial of Velasquez-Martinez’s requests for
asylum,
withholding
of
removal,
and
protection
under
the
the
record,
including
the
Convention Against Torture.
We
have
transcript
of
thoroughly
Velasquez-Martinez’s
supporting evidence.
not
compel
a
reviewed
ruling
merits
hearing
and
all
We conclude that the record evidence does
contrary
to
any
of
the
administrative
factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that
substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.
Elias–Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992).
See INS v.
Accordingly, we deny
the petition for review in part for the reasons stated by the
Board.
We
See In re: Barriga-Vega (B.I.A. Apr. 27, 2015).
lack
jurisdiction
to
consider
Velasquez-Martinez’s
challenges to the immigration judge’s denial of his request for
protection under the Convention Against Torture on the ground
that he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.
See 8
U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2012); Massis v. Mukasey, 549 F.3d 631,
638-40 (4th Cir. 2008).
We therefore dismiss this portion of
the petition for review.
2
Appeal: 15-1567
Doc: 20
Filed: 12/30/2015
Pg: 3 of 3
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions
are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this court and argument would not 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?