Idahosa v. BICE, et al

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
October 20, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-20246
Summary Calendar
FIDELIS OSAZUWA IDAHOSA,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Respondents-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-03-CV-3944)
Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Fidelis Osazuwa Idahosa appeals, pro se, the dismissal, for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction, of his complaint seeking
review of the denial of his application for naturalization. Our
review is de novo. Aparicio v. Blakeway, 302 F.3d 437, 441 (5th
Cir. 2002).
Courts may review the denial of an application for
naturalization only after it has been reviewed in an administrative
hearing before an immigration officer. 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c). Idahosa

-- 1 of 2 --

2
did not comply with the applicable regulations for obtaining such
a hearing. See 8 C.F.R. § 336.2; 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c). Because
Idahosa did not exhaust the available administrative remedies, the
district court lacked jurisdiction to review the denial of his
application for naturalization. See 8 C.F.R. § 336.9(d); see also
Townsend v. United States Dep’t of Justice Immigration &
Naturalization Serv., 799 F.2d 179, 181 (5th Cir. 1986).
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --