United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 16, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-60571
Summary Calendar
ZAHIDA JABEEN JAMAAL KHAN,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A95-344-562
--------------------
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM:*
Zahida Jabeen Jamaal Khan (Khan) has filed a petition for
review of an order of removal of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(BIA). She argues that the BIA erred when it rejected her claim
that removal proceedings should be terminated because the
proceedings were instituted based on information set forth in an
application for benefits that she filed under the confidentiality
provisions of the Legal Immigration Family Equity (LIFE) Act.
As the BIA noted in its order of removal, the
confidentiality requirements of the Immigration and Nationality
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 06-60571
-2-
Act are applicable to applications for legalization under the
LIFE Act. Immigration and Nationality Act § 245A(c)(5), 8 U.S.C.
§ 1255a(c)(5)(A)(i); LIFE Act, PL 106-553, 2000 HR 4942,*2762A-
148; 8 C.F.R. § 245a.21. However, the Immigration Judge’s
determination that Khan failed to establish that she filed an
application under the LIFE Act is based upon substantial
evidence. See Roy v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132, 137-38 (5th Cir.
2004). Moreover, the Immigration Judge’s determination that an
independent source apprised Immigration and Customs Enforcement
officials of Khan’s illegal status is also based upon substantial
evidence. See id. The BIA therefore did not err when it
determined that the confidentiality provisions of the LIFE Act
were not violated.
Khan’s petition for review is DENIED.