Irma Lanwglois-Roldan v. Loretta Lynch

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A078-147-273 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000159496].. [16-2445]

Appeal: 16-2445

Doc: 29

Filed: 09/21/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2445

IRMA IVONNE LANWGLOIS-ROLDAN,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: August 28, 2017

Decided: September 21, 2017

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anna M. Gallagher, MAGGIO & KATTAR, P.C., Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Chad
A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Dawn S. Conrad, Senior Litigation
Counsel, Remi Da Rocha-Afodu, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-2445

Doc: 29

Filed: 09/21/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Irma Ivonne Lanwglois-Roldan, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her untimely
motion to reopen.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including Lanwglois-

Roldan’s supporting evidence and conclude that the record evidence does not compel a
ruling 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. See INS v. Elias–
Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board.
In re Lanwglois-Roldan (B.I.A. Dec. 9, 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 decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

2