Rigoberto Osorio-Sanchez v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 11-1003 (4th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1003 RIGOBERTO OSORIO-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: August 19, 2011 Before TRAXLER, Judges. Chief Judge, Decided: and GREGORY September 2, 2011 and DAVIS, Circuit Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marc SeguinÃ³t, SEGUINÃ T & ASSOCIATES, PC, Dunn Loring, Virginia, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Carl H. McIntyre, Assistant Director, Justin R. Markel, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, DC, for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rigoberto Mexico, petitions Immigration Osorio-Sanchez, for Appeals review of ( Board ) immigration proceedings. a an native order denying his and of citizen the motion Board to of of reopen This court reviews the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2011); see INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 323-24 (1992); Mosere v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 397, 400 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 137 (2009). We will reverse a denial of a motion to reopen only arbitrary, if it is irrational, or contrary to law. Mosere, 552 F.3d at 400 (internal quotation marks omitted). In his appellate brief, Osorio-Sanchez presents no argument relevant to whether the Board abused its discretion in denying his motion to reopen. issue has been abandoned Therefore, we conclude that this on appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A); United States v. Al-Hamdi, 356 F.3d 564, 571 n.8 (4th Cir. 2004) ( It is a well settled rule that contentions not raised in the argument section of the opening brief are abandoned. ); Yousefi v. INS, 260 F.3d 318, 326 (4th Cir. 2001) (stating failure to raise an issue in an opening brief results in abandonment of that petition for review. 2010). legal issue). Accordingly, we deny the See In re: Osorio-Sanchez (B.I.A. Dec. 22, We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 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.