Mary Nasoh v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1240
MARY NASOH,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: November 4, 2011 Decided: November 30, 2011
Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Theodore N. Nkwenti, LAW OFFICE OF THEODORE NKWENTI, Silver
Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General, Francis W. Fraser, Senior Litigation Counsel, Susan K.
Houser, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Mary Nasoh, a native and citizen of Cameroon,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) denying her motions to reopen and reconsider.
Because Nasoh fails to raise any arguments that meaningfully
challenge the propriety of the Board’s denial of her motions to
reopen and reconsider in the argument section of her brief, we
find that she has failed to preserve any issues for review. See
Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A) (“[T]he argument . . . must contain
. . . appellant’s contentions and the reasons for them, with
citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which
the appellant relies.”); Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d
231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999) (“Failure to comply with the
specific dictates of [Rule 28] with respect to a particular
claim triggers abandonment of that claim on appeal.”).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons
stated by the Board. See In re: Nasoh (B.I.A. Feb. 17, 2011).
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 --