Case Name: Kumar HARSH, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-02-15
Citations: 32 F. App'x 661
Docket Number: No. 00-2161
Parties: Kumar HARSH, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 32
Pages: 661–661

Head Matter:
Kumar HARSH, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 00-2161.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 6, 2001.
Decided Feb. 15, 2001.
Alfred L. Robertson, Springfield, Virginia, for Petitioner. David W. Ogden, Assistant Attorney General, Jeffrey L. Bernstein, Senior Litigation, John L. Davis, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
PER CURIAM.
Kumar Harsh petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board's August 8, 2000, decision and conclude that Harsh's appeal to this court, filed September 8, 2000, was filed one day late under the applicable transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Pub.L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009. See IIRIRA § 309(c)(4)(C); 8 U.S.C.A. § 1252(b)(1) (West 1999) (stating that petitions for review must be filed no later than thirty days after the date of the final order of removal).
We are therefore compelled to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.
DISMISSED.