Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Adilio RIVERA, also known as Jose Alirio Rivera, also known as Jose Nochez-Rivera, also known as Jose A. Rivera, also known as Jose Rivera, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-02-18
Citations: 311 F. App'x 698
Docket Number: No. 08-20469
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Adilio RIVERA, also known as Jose Alirio Rivera, also known as Jose Nochez-Rivera, also known as Jose A. Rivera, also known as Jose Rivera, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 311
Pages: 698–698

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Adilio RIVERA, also known as Jose Alirio Rivera, also known as Jose Nochez-Rivera, also known as Jose A. Rivera, also known as Jose Rivera, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-20469
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 18, 2009.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jose Adilio Rivera raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Lopez-Ortiz, 313 F.3d 225, 229-31 (5th Cir.2002), which held that an immigration judge's failure to inform an alien of his eligibility for discretionary waiver of removal at his removal proceeding did not render the proceeding fundamentally unfair. See Romero-Rodriguez v. Gonzales, 488 F.3d 672, 677 n. 5 (5th Cir.2007). The Government's motion for summary affir-mance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.