Case ID: f-appx_81/html/0795-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Pierre Antoine GOHO, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
    No. 03-1528.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 19, 2003.
    Decided Dec. 3, 2003.
    Allan Ebert, Law Offices of Allan Ebert, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.
    Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Earle B. Wilson, Senior Litigation Counsel, Carol Federighi, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before WTDENER, WILKINSON, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Pierre Antoine Goho, a native and citizen of the Ivory Coast, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Goho’s motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2003); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning of the Board. See In re: Goho, No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ] (B.I.A. Apr. 2, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED