Case Name: Brook MENGESHA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-28
Citations: 78 F. App'x 914
Docket Number: No. 02-2145
Parties: Brook MENGESHA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 78
Pages: 914–914

Head Matter:
Brook MENGESHA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 02-2145.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 8, 2003.
Decided Oct. 28, 2003.
Mikre-Michael Ayelle, Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Christopher C. Fuller, Senior Litigation, Ethan B. Kanter, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Brook Mengesha, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review from the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("Board") order denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the administrative record and the Board's order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying Mengesha's motion to reconsider. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2003); INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24, 112 S.Ct. 719, 116 L.Ed.2d 823 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the reasoning of the Board. See In re: Mengesha, No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ] (B.I.A. Sept. 9, 2002). 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.