Case ID: f-appx_112/html/0289-02.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

Ulisses M. BASTOS, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 04-1432.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 20, 2004.
    Decided: Nov. 4, 2004.
    
      Antonio M. Zaldana, Law Office of Antonio M. Zaldana, Los Angeles, California, for Petitioner.
    Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Hunolt, Senior Litigation Counsel, Sarah Maloney, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Ulisses M. Bastos, a native and citizen of Brazil, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen and dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s denial of his motions to reopen and reconsider. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). Additionally, we conclude that Bastos’s due process claim is without merit. See Blanco de Belbruno v. Ashcroft, 362 F.3d 272, 278 (4th Cir.2004); Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 321-22 (4th Cir.2002).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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