UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1543
BEDES TAMASANG NDENGE
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 05-2032
BEDES TAMASANG NDENGE
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A95-229-622)
Submitted: September 23, 2005 Decided: October 12, 2005
Before WILLIAMS, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert Usumanu, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for Petitioner. John L.
Brownlee, United States Attorney, Julie C. Dudley, Assistant United
States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Bedes Tamasang Ndenge, a
native and citizen of Cameroon, challenges two orders of the Board
of Immigration Appeals (Board). In No. 04-1543, Ndenge seeks
review of an order of the Board affirming the immigration judge’s
order finding Ndenge removable and denying his applications for
asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention
Against Torture. In No. 05-2032, Ndenge petitions for review of a
Board order denying his motion to reopen the removal proceedings.
Ndenge failed to raise any argument in his brief concerning
the Board’s order in No. 04-1543. Therefore, he has abandoned
appellate review of this order. See Edwards v. City of Goldsboro,
178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999). In No. 05-2032, we have
reviewed the administrative record and conclude that the Board did
not abuse its discretion in denying Ndenge’s motion to reopen. See
8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2005).
We accordingly deny the petitions for review in these
cases. 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
- 3 -