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)
23-1254•Nikola T. Guenov; Vida Gueorguiva Guenova v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
23-1254Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit31.08.2023
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1254
NIKOLA T. GUENOV; VIDA GUEORGUIVA GUENOVA,
Petitioners,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: August 29, 2023 Decided: August 31, 2023
Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Andres Y. Mejer, ANDRES MEJER IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS,
Eatontown, New Jersey, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant
Attorney General, Jonathan Robbins, Assistant Director, Erik R. Quick, Office of
Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Nikola T. Guenov and his wife, Vida Gueorguiva Guenova (Petitioners), natives
and citizens of Bulgaria, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals denying Petitioners’ motion for sua sponte reopening of their removal
proceedings. Upon review of the parties’ briefs, considered in conjunction with the
administrative record and the relevant authorities, we agree with the Attorney General that
we lack jurisdiction to review the subject order. See Lawrence v. Lynch, 826 F.3d 198,
206-07 (4th Cir. 2016) (affirming that this court “lack[s] jurisdiction to review how the
Board exercises its sua sponte discretion”); Mosere v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 397, 400-01 (4th
Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we dismiss this petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
PETITION DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.