The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
10-1718•Zhao Wen Chen v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General
10-1718Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDec 13, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1718
ZHAO WEN CHEN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: November 16, 2011 Decided: December 13, 2011
Before KING, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per
curiam opinion.
Michael Brown, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West,
Assistant Attorney General, William C. Peachey, Assistant
Director, Paul T. Cygnarowicz, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Zhao Wen Chen, a native and citizen of China,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (Board) denying his motions to reconsider and reopen.
We have reviewed the administrative record and Chen’s claims and
conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying
Chen’s motion to reopen his asylum claim. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.2(a), (c) (2011). We accordingly deny the petition for
review in part for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re:
Chen (B.I.A. June 2, 2010). We dismiss the petition for review
in part for lack of jurisdiction with respect to Chen’s
challenge to the Board’s denial of his motion to reopen and
reconsider his claim for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) (2006). Finally, 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 IN PART
AND DISMISSED IN PART
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.