Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
07-1913•John Kojo Shoetan v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General
07-1913Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit07.04.2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1913
JOHN KOJO SHOETAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals
Submitted: March 11, 2010 Decided: April 7, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joshua A. Moses, JOSHUA MOSES & ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring,
Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General, James E. Grimes, Senior Litigation Counsel, Gerald M.
Alexander, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
John Kojo Shoetan, a native and citizen of Ghana,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s order and finding Shoetan was an arriving alien and that
the immigration judge did not have jurisdiction to consider his
application for adjustment of status. Accordingly, because
Shoetan had no other applications for relief pending before the
immigration judge, the order of removal stands.
We have reviewed the record and the amended
regulations pertinent to Shoetan’s claim and deny the petition
for review. See Brito v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 160, 167-68 (2d Cir.
2008); Chambers v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 445, 450 (5th Cir. 2008).
We also deny the motion to place the petition for review in
abeyance. 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.