NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Argued July 12, 2011
Decided August 4, 2011
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge
JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge
No. 10‐2730
EUGENE JOSEPH Petition for review of an Order of the
Petitioner, Board of Immigration Appeals.
v. No. A 74 104 543
ERIC H. HOLDER,
Attorney General of the United States,
Respondent.
O R D E R
Eugene Joseph, a Nigerian citizen, petitions for review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals denying his fourth motion to reopen his removal proceedings. That
motion asserted that Joseph had new evidence to support his claim of ineffective assistance
of counsel.
We assume familiarity with the facts presented in our previous order. Joseph v.
Holder, 321 F. App’x 505 (7th Cir. 2009). For our purposes, it is sufficient to note that the
petition for review now before us completely fails to address the Board’s rejection of
Joseph’s ineffective‐assistance claim. Instead, Joseph challenges the IJ’s original denial of his
request for a waiver of inadmissibility and the Board’s prior decisions on his previous
administrative appeals. Joseph’s only mention of the Board’s latest decision in his current
No. 10‐2730 Page 2
petition appears in the jurisdictional statement, in which he refers to the decision merely to
show that the petition was timely. Because Joseph failed to articulate any argument with
respect to the Board’s latest decision, we conclude that he has forfeited his right to seek
judicial review of that decision. See Haxhiu v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 685, 691 (7th Cir. 2008);
Asere v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 378, 381 (7th Cir. 2006); Brucaj v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 602, 611 n.7
(7th Cir. 2004).
The petition for review is DISMISSED.
Eugene Joseph v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Combined Opinion