13-1608 Maciejowski v. Holder BIA Straus, IJ A099 158 685 

## UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS **FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT** 

# SUMMARY ORDER

**RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER**  **FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF**  **APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN**  **ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.**  **At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for** 1 **the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States** 2 **Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 30 th**  3 **day of May, two thousand fourteen.** 4 5 **PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN,** 6 **DENNIS JACOBS,** 7 **JOSÉ A. CABRANES.** 8 Circuit Judges**.** 9

**_______________________________________** 10 11 **EDWARD MACIEJOWSKI,** 12 Petitioner**,** 13 14 **v. 13-1608** 15 16 **ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., UNITED STATES** 17 **ATTORNEY GENERAL,** 18 Respondent **.** 19

**______________________________________** 20 21 **FOR PETITIONER: Glenn T. Terk, Wethersfield,** 22 **Connecticut.** 23 24 **FOR RESPONDENT: Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney** 25 **General; Holly M. Smith, Senior** 26 **Litigation Counsel; Edward C. Durant,** 27 **Attorney, Office of Immigration** 28 **Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice,** 29 **Washington D.C.** 30 311 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is 4
DISMISSED. 5 Petitioner Edward Maciejowski, a native and citizen of 6 Poland, seeks review of an April 5, 2013, decision of the BIA 7 affirming the June 14, 2011, decision of Immigration Judge (“IJ”) 8 Michael W. Straus, denying as a matter of discretion his 9 application to adjust status. In re Edward Maciejowski, No. A099 10 158 685 (B.I.A. Apr. 5, 2013), aff’gNo. A099 158 685 (Immig. Ct. 11 Hartford June 14, 2011). We assume the parties’ familiarity with 12 the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 13 We have considered both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for 14 the sake of completeness.” Zaman v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 233, 237 15 (2d Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 16 Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B), we lack jurisdiction to 17 review the agency’s exercise of discretion to deny Maciejowksi’s 18 application to adjust status. See Guyadin v. Gonzales , 449 F.3d 19 465, 468-69 (2d Cir. 2006). We do retain jurisdiction to review 20 de novo“constitutional claims or questions of law.” 8 U.S.C. 21 § 1252(a)(2)(D); Pierre v. Holder, 588 F.3d 767, 772 (2d Cir. 22 2009). However, “we lack jurisdiction to review any legal 23 argument that is so insubstantial and frivolous as to be 24 inadequate to invoke federal-question jurisdiction.” Barco25 Sandoval v. Gonzales , 516 F.3d 35, 40 (2d Cir. 2008). 26 

### 2Maciejowski’s arguments are not colorable. First, contrary 1 to his main contention, the IJ and BIA did not rely solely on the 2 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ determination that he 3 married to obtain immigration benefits: the IJ afforded 4 Maciejowski the opportunity to supplement the record with 5 evidence relevant to the bona fide nature of his marriage. 6 Second, probative record evidence supports the IJ’s and BIA’s 7 finding that his marriage was fraudulent and entered into for the 8 purpose of obtaining immigration benefits. 9 Since Maciejowski fails to raise a colorable constitutional 10 claim or question of law, we are without jurisdiction to review 11 the agency’s discretionary denial of relief. See 8 U.S.C. 12 § 1252(a)(2)(B); see also Guyadin , 449 F.3d at 468-69; Barco13 Sandoval , 516 F.3d at 40. 14 For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is 15
DISMISSED. 16 FOR THE COURT: 17 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk 18 19 20



### 3