Oladipupo vs. INS, (5th Cir. 1999)
Linked as:
Text
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-60268 Summary Calendar ABIDEEN OLADIPUPO, also known as Anthony A. Oladipupo, Petitioner, versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A71-892-451 - August 16, 1999 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Abideen Oladipupo appeals the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals finding him deportable, denying his application for asylum and suspension of deportation, and denying his motion to remand. Oladipupo also argues that he was denied due process by his lack of representation.
After reviewing the record and the briefs of the parties, we find that substantial evidence supports the BoardÂ’s decision that Oladipupo is deportable and not eligible for asylum. Chun v. INS , 40 F.3d at 76, 78 (5th Cir. 1994). We further find that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying OladipupoÂ’s motion to remand. Ogbemudia v. INS , 988 F.2d 595, 599-600 (5th Cir. 1993).
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”), Pub. L.
No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009, is applicable to all aliens in proceedings on April 1, 1997, for whom a final order of deportation was entered more than thirty days after September 30, 1996. IIRIRA § 309(c)(4)(E); Eyoum v. INS , 125 F.3d 889, 891 (5th Cir. 1997). Under IIRIRA, this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review claims for discretionary relief, such as suspension of deportation. Eyoum , 125 F.3d at 891; Pilch v. INS , 129 F.3d 969, 970 (7th Cir. 1997).
Because the BIAÂ’s final order of deportation was entered on April 30, 1998, we lack subject matter jurisdiction to review OladipupoÂ’s appeal regarding suspension of deportation.
The petition for review is DENIED. All outstanding motions are also DENIED.
No. 98-60268
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Roland Felix Eyoum, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent., 125 F.3d 889 (5th Cir. 1997)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Solomon Ogbemudia, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent., 988 F.2d 595 (5th Cir. 1993)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit - Stanislaw Pilch and Zofia Pilch, Petitioners, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service and Janet Reno, United States Attorney General, Respondents., 129 F.3d 969 (7th Cir. 1998)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
