U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2005

Gossett v. Gonzales

Gossett v. Gonzales
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 28, 2005

Gossett v. Gonzales

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1766

BOZENA GOSSETT, a/k/a Bozena Iratova, Petitioner, versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A79-417-800)

Submitted: February 16, 2005 Decided: February 28, 2005

Before WILLIAMS and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David F. Vedder, DAVID F. VEDDER, P.A., Daytona Beach, Florida, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Anthony P. Nicastro, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Bozena Gossett, a native and citizen of the Czech Republic, petitions for review of an order of the immigration judge, as affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals, denying her motion to reopen. Our review of the denial of a motion to reopen is extremely deferential, and the decision will not be reversed absent abuse of discretion. Stewart v. INS, 181 F.3d 587, 595 (4th Cir. 1999). Such motions are disfavored. INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323 (1992). We have reviewed the administrative record and conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in affirming the immigration judge’s denial of the motion to reopen. 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 -

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.