Case Name: Juan DE LA CRUZ-PUENTE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-09-24
Citations: 76 F. App'x 553
Docket Number: No. 02-60922
Parties: Juan DE LA CRUZ-PUENTE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 76
Pages: 553–554

Head Matter:
Juan DE LA CRUZ-PUENTE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-60922.
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 24, 2003.
Salvador Colon, Colon & Olvera, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.
John Ashcroft, David V. Bernal, Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Regina Byrd, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, US Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, US Immigration & Naturaliza tion Service, District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Juan de la Cruz-Puente (de la Cruz), represented by counsel, petitions this court for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge's decision denying his application for cancellation of a removal order entered against him. De la Cruz has failed to provide citations to legal authorities in support of his allegations or to identify adequately any errors committed by the immigration judge or the BIA and has raised different issues in the argument and summary of argument sections of his brief. See Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(9); 5th Cir. R. 28.3(j); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987).
Accordingly, de la Cruz's petition is DENIED for failure to brief his issues. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir.2003).
PETITION DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined, that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.