Gonzalez-Gonzalez v. Gonzales, No. 06-1413 (4th Cir. 2007)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1413 SEGUNDO WALTER GONZALEZ-GONZALEZ, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A72-170-975) Submitted: February 7, 2007 Decided: February 27, 2007 Before MICHAEL and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frederic W. Schwartz, Jr., Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Kristin K. Edison, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Segundo Walter Gonzalez-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Ecuador, petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the immigration judge s discretionary denial of his application for adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of a person admitted for permanent residence. We have considered Gonzalez-Gonzalez s challenge to the discretionary denial of his application for adjustment of status and conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review it. See 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) (2000) (governing adjustment of status applications); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) (2000) ( [N]o court shall have jurisdiction to review any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section . . . 1255 [the section governing adjustment of status]); Velasquez-Gabriel v. Crocetti, 263 F.3d 102, 104 n.1 (4th Cir. 2001). We accordingly dismiss the petition for review. We deny Gonzalez-Gonzalez s motion for stay of removal. We dispense with oral contentions argument because the facts and legal are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DISMISSED - 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.