Case Name: Kenneth N. UGOCHUKWU, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-22
Citations: 187 F. App'x 273
Docket Number: No. 05-1836
Parties: Kenneth N. UGOCHUKWU, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 187
Pages: 273–273

Head Matter:
Kenneth N. UGOCHUKWU, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
No. 05-1836.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 9, 2006.
Decided: June 22, 2006.
Nana Babington, Babington Law Office, PLLC, Falls Church, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Carol Federighi, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jill Ptacek, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before WILKINSON 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Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth N. Ugochukwu, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying as untimely his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board's order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. See INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-34, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii) (2006). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In Re: Ugochukwu, No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ] (B.I.A. July 25, 2005). 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.