Beatrice v. Wiles

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-2008
BEATRICE V. WILES,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A70-799-675)
Submitted: April 20, 2005 Decided: May 31, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ephraim Tahir Mella, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Petitioner.
Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal,
Assistant Director, Anthony C. Payne, Office of Immigration
Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.,
for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Beatrice V. Wiles, a native and citizen of Liberia,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) denying her motion to reopen. We deny the
petition for review.
Insofar as Wiles challenges the Board’s decision not to
sua sponte reopen her case, we find we are without jurisdiction.
See Belay-Gebru v. INS, 327 F.3d 998, 1000-01 (10th Cir. 2003);
Calle-Vujiles v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 472, 474-75 (3d Cir. 2003);
Ekimian v. INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir. 2002); Luis v. INS,
196 F.3d 36, 40-41 (1st Cir. 1999). The Board also noted Wiles’
motion to reopen was untimely as it was filed almost seven years
after the Board closed the case. In her opening brief to this
court, Wiles does not challenge that finding. Accordingly, we
decline to review that decision. See United States v. Al-Hamdi,
356 F.3d 564, 571 n.8 (4th Cir. 2004); Edwards v. City of
Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999).
We deny the petition for review. 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 --