Sall v. Ashcroft, (4th Cir. 2004)

Text

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-2352 EL HADJI SALL; ANTA MBAYE DIAGNE, Petitioners, versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A95-226-098)

Submitted: August 6, 2004 Decided: August 23, 2004

Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bokwe G. Mofor, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioners. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant

Director, Luis E. Perez, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).

- 2 - PER CURIAM: El Hadji Sall and his wife, Anta Mbaye Diagne, natives and citizens of Se negal, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying their motion to reconsider its

denial of their application for asylum. We dismiss the petition

for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioners first challenge the Immigration Judge§ 1158(a)(2)(B) (2000); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.4(a) (2004). We conclude

we lack jurisdiction to review this claim. See U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3) (2000). Petitioners next dispute the IJÂ’s finding that they failed to qualify for withholding of removal and

protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed

the administrative record and conclude that petitioners did not

properly exhaust this claim because they failed to raise it in

their motion for reconsideration. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1)

  (2000); Asika v. Ashcroft

, 362 F.3d 264, 267 n.3 (4th Cir. 2004). We accordingly dismiss 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 DISMISSED

---