Shqipron Kolgeci v. Loretta Lynch
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A200-233-363. Copies to all parties and the agency.. [16-1748]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General,
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
February 17, 2017
February 23, 2017
Before KING, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition dismissed in part and denied in part by unpublished per
Gregory Marotta, Vernon, New Jersey, for Petitioner.
C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Emily
Anne Radford, Assistant Director, Holly M. Smith, Senior
Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Shqipron Kolgeci, a native of Yugoslavia and a citizen of
immigration judge’s decision denying his requests for asylum,
petition for review.
his asylum application is time-barred and that no exceptions
§ 1158(a)(2)(B) (2012); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(2) (2016).
jurisdiction to review this determination pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
§ 1158(a)(3) (2012), and find that Kolgeci has not raised any
claims that would fall under the exception set forth in 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(a)(2)(D) (2012).
59 (4th Cir. 2009).
See Gomis v. Holder, 571 F.3d 353, 358-
Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for
review with respect to Kolgeci’s asylum claim.
Kolgeci next disputes the agency’s finding that he failed
to establish past persecution.
We have thoroughly reviewed the
record, including the transcript of Kolgeci’s merits hearing,
contrary to any of the administrative findings of fact, see 8
Pg: 3 of 3
supports the Board’s decision.
See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502
review in part for the reasons stated by the Board.
See In re
Kolgeci (B.I.A. June 9, 2016).
petition for review.
We dispense with oral argument because the
PETITION DISMISSED IN PART
AND DENIED IN PART
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?