Background
Muinat Biodun Lawal, a native and citizen of Ghana, asked the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen her immigration proceedings on its own motion so that she could apply for adjustment of status.
After the BIA denied the motion for sua sponte reopening, Lawal petitioned the Fourth Circuit for review. The Attorney General argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s exercise of that discretionary authority.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth Circuit dismissed Lawal’s petition for lack of jurisdiction. Relying on Lawrence v. Lynch, 826 F.3d 198, 206-07 (4th Cir. 2016), and Mosere v. Mukasey, 552 F.3d 397, 400-01 (4th Cir. 2009), the court reaffirmed that it cannot review how the BIA exercises its sua sponte discretion.
Because Lawal challenged the BIA’s refusal to reopen proceedings on its own motion, the court did not reach the merits of her proposed adjustment-of-status application. It also dispensed with oral argument because the written materials adequately presented the facts and legal issues.
Key Takeaways
- The Fourth Circuit lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s exercise of its sua sponte reopening discretion.
- A request to reopen proceedings so a noncitizen can seek adjustment of status does not, by itself, create appellate jurisdiction over the BIA’s refusal.
- The court dismissed the petition without addressing whether Lawal qualified for adjustment of status.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces a significant jurisdictional barrier for immigration litigants seeking review of the BIA’s refusal to reopen proceedings sua sponte. In the Fourth Circuit, framing reopening as a path to pursue adjustment of status does not permit judicial review of the Board’s discretionary decision.
The unpublished opinion is not binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit, but it applies the circuit’s established jurisdictional rule to dismiss the petition at the threshold.