Bukola Bashorun v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-60375 Affirmed ] Judge: JES , Judge: RHB , Judge: ECP Mandate pull date is 05/21/2015 [14-60375]

Download PDF
Case: 14-60375 Document: 00512985103 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-60375 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 30, 2015 BUKOLA BASHORUN, Petitioner Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A071 794 879 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Bukola Bashorun, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) dismissing her appeal challenging the immigration judge’s (IJ) conclusion she was not entitled to asylum or withholding of deportation, and order of removal, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.13(a), 1208.13(a). Bashorun maintains she made the necessary showing to be eligible for asylum and withholding of deportation. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 14-60375 Document: 00512985103 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2015 No. 14-60375 Bashorun, however, has abandoned her claims by failing to brief them sufficiently. See, e.g., Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003) (holding arguments not briefed are abandoned). Her counseled brief states claims in a perfunctory and conclusory manner. Bashorun fails to cite the record or otherwise discuss pertinent facts, does not apply the relevant legal standards to the specific facts of the case, and provides no legal analysis or substantive discussion of the bases for her claims. Furthermore, she does not address the grounds upon which the IJ and the BIA denied her claims, and does not identify any particular claimed error by them. (Moreover, we need not consider new evidence or claims not offered in the administrative proceedings or extraneous contentions that do not concern the instant case. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A); Wang v. Ashcroft, 260 F.3d 448, 452-53 (5th Cir. 2001).) Accordingly, Bashorun has waived her claims for relief. See, e.g., Soadjede, 324 F.3d at 833; Townsend v. INS, 799 F.2d 179, 182 (5th Cir. 1986) (per curiam); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A). DENIED. 2

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?