Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-24-01696/USCOURTS-ca4-24-01696-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Merrick B. Garland
Respondent
Nabor Gonzalez-Gonzalez
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1696

NABOR GONZALEZ-GONZALEZ,

 Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of An Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: December 5, 2024 Decided: December 9, 2024

Before GREGORY and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Russell 

J.E. Verby, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1696 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/09/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Nabor Gonzalez-Gonzalez, a native and citizen Mexico, petitions for review of an 

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his motion to reopen as 

untimely and declining to exercise its authority to sua sponte reopen the proceedings. On 

appeal, Gonzalez does not argue that the Board erred in dismissing the motion as untimely.

Ullah v. Garland, 72 F.4th 597, 602 (4th Cir. 2023) (explaining that a party forfeits 

appellate review of those issues and claims not raised in the party’s briefs). Regarding 

Gonzales’s challenge to the Board’s denial of his request for sua sponte reopening, see 8 

C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2023), we lack jurisdiction to review that decision, see Lawrence v. 

Lynch, 826 F.3d 198, 206-07 (4th Cir. 2016). 

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 this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1696 Doc: 15 Filed: 12/09/2024 Pg: 2 of 2