Case ID: f-appx_67/html/0824-02.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

Kester K. AKINFOLARIN, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
    No. 02-1971.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 17, 2003.
    Decided June 26, 2003.
    
      Danielle L.C. Beach-Oswald, Noto & Oswald, P.C., Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Russell J.E. Verby, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Kester K. AMnfolarin, a native and citizen of Nigeria, seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen. We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. See 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(a) (2003); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992); Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587, 595 (4th Cir.1999). A denial of a motion to reopen must be reviewed with extreme deference, since immigration statutes do not contemplate reopening and the applicable regulations disfavor motions to reopen. M.A. v. INS, 899 F.2d 304, 308 (4th Cir.1990) (en banc). We have reviewed the administrative record, the Board’s order and the IJ’s decision and find no abuse of discretion. We accordingly deny the petition for review. We grant the motion for leave to file two documents. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED.