Maria Lourdes Flores v. Michael Mukasey, No. 08-1017 (4th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1017 MARIA LOURDES BARBARA FLORES, a/k/a Maria Lourdes Barbara Fury, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 08-1622 MARIA LOURDES BARBARA FLORES, a/k/a Maria Lourdes Barbara Fury, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: January 7, 2009 Decided: January 26, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petitions denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeremiah Johnson, REEVES & ASSOCIATES, APLC, San Francisco, California, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Michelle Gorden Latour, Assistant Director, Joseph A. O Connell, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Maria Lourdes Barbara Flores, a native and citizen of the Philippines, seeks review of orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying her motions to reopen. We have reviewed Flores arguments and find no abuse of discretion in the Board s decisions denying her motions to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2008); Afanwi v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 788 (4th Cir. 2008). To the extent Flores challenges the underlying decision of the Immigration Judge that was previously affirmed by the Board, those orders have already been reviewed by this court and are otherwise not part of the instant consolidated petitions for review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(2) (2006); Stone v. INS, 514 U.S. 386, 405 (1995). Accordingly, we deny in part and dismiss in part the petitions 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. PETITIONS DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART 3

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.