KUM v. MUKASEY, 292 Fed.Appx. 215 (4th Cir. 2008)

No. 07-2117.United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.Submitted: July 31, 2008.
Decided: September 2, 2008.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Albert Isiaka Usumanu, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, Leslie McKay, Senior Litigation Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Blasius Mvo Kum, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration appeals (Board) denying his untimely motions to recalendar removal proceedings and reissue its order of October 1, 2004.[*] Kum asserts that the Board erred in refusing to reopen his proceedings on account of ineffective assistance of counsel that violated his rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. We find that such a claim is not cognizable in immigration proceedings. See Afanwi v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 788, 798 (4th Cir. 2008) (holding that retained counsel’s ineffective assistance in a removal proceeding cannot deprive an alien of his Fifth Amendment right to a fundamentally fair hearing).

We accordingly deny the petition 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.

PETITION DENIED.