Case ID: f-appx_429/html/0899-01.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

Edward Henry LOMBANA-CANO, Petitioner, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.
    No. 10-14873
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    June 10, 2011.
    Arturo Aponte-Pares, Aponte & Associates, Orlando, FL, for Petitioner.
    David Bernal, Krystal Samuels, Walter Bocchini, U.S. Department of Justice— Office of Immigration Litigation, Eric Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Michelle Ressler, District Counsel’s Office Usice, Miami, FL, for Respondent.
    Before PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Edward Henry Lombana-Cano, a native and citizen of Colombia, petitions this Court to review the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals that denied Lombana-Cano’s motion to reconsider. We deny the petition.

Lombana-Cano failed to specify in his motion to reconsider any errors of fact and law in the decision of the Board. In his motion, Lombana-Cano repeated the arguments from his appeal that he had suffered past persecution and feared future persecution on account of a political opinion that the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia attributed to him as a dentist working for the Colombian government. Lombana-Cano v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 360 Fed.Appx. 70, 70-71 (11th Cir.2010). By “merely reiterating arguments previously presented to the [Board],” Lombana-Cano failed to “ ‘specify! ] ... errors of fact or law’ as required for a successful motion to reconsider.” Calle v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 504 F.3d 1324, 1329 (11th Cir.2007) (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b)(1)). The Board did not abuse its discretion by denying Lombana-Cano’s motion to reconsider.

Lombana-Cano’s petition for review is DENIED.