Eric Ronaldo Garay Villegas v. Loretta Lynch
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying petition for review [999986290-2]. Originating case number: A200-233-985. Copies to all parties and the agency. .. [16-2411]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ERIC RONALDO GARAY VILLEGAS,
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: August 9, 2017
Decided: August 16, 2017
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jay S. Marks, LAW OFFICES OF JAY S. MARKS, LLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for
Petitioner. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Nancy Friedman, Senior
Litigation Counsel, Kevin J. Conway, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 2
Eric Ronaldo Garay Villegas, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to
reopen. We have reviewed the Board’s order, in conjunction with the administrative
record, and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion as
untimely. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2) (2017). We therefore deny the petition for review
substantially* for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re Garay Villegas (B.I.A. Nov.
17, 2016). 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
Even assuming that Garay Villegas substantially complied with the requirements
set forth in In re Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (B.I.A. 1988), as he contends, substantial
evidence supports the Board’s alternative conclusion that “the face of the record itself does
not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.”
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?