Thapa v. Gonzales, No. 05-2347 (4th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2347 MIN BAHADUR THAPA; SHIV KUMARI PAIJA; RAMESH THAPA, Petitioners, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A95-886-496; A95-886-497; A95-886-498) Submitted: May 31, 2006 Decided: June 14, 2006 Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Khagendra Gharti-Chhetry, CHHETRY & ASSOCIATES, P.C., New York, New York, for Petitioners. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Larry P. Cote, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Min Bahadur Thapa, and dependent petitioners Shiv Kumari Paija and Ramesh Thapa, natives and citizens of Nepal, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying their motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the Board s order and find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reopen. INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992). See Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. In Re: Thapa, Nos. A95-886-496, 497, 498 (B.I.A. Nov. 3, 2005). See 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 -

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.