
USCA1 Opinion

	




        December 9, 1994        [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 94-1378                                  STEPHEN O. DAWODU,                                     Petitioner,                                          v.                       IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,                                     Respondent.                                 ____________________                         ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER                           OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS                                 ____________________                                        Before                                  Cyr, Circuit Judge,                                       _____________                         Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge, and                                   ____________________                                Stahl, Circuit Judge.                                       _____________                                 ____________________            Stephen O. Dawodu on brief pro se.            _________________            Frank  W.  Hunger, Assistant  Attorney  General,  Civil  Division,            _________________        Nelda  C. Reyna and Richard M. Evans, Attorneys, Office of Immigration        _______________     ________________        Litigation, Civil Division, on brief for respondent.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  Petitioner Stephen Dawodu seeks review                      __________            of  a Board of  Immigration Appeals order  denying his motion            seeking  reconsideration  of  the  Board's  dismissal  of his            appeal from an  immigration judge's denial  of his motion  to            reopen his deportation proceedings.  We deny the petition for            review for the reasons  stated by the Board in  its decisions            dated  February 23, 1994 and April 8,  1994.  We add only the            following brief comments.                      On   appeal,  Dawodu  suggests   that  one  of  the            questions before us is the validity of his deportation order.            We disagree.   Since Dawodu  failed to file  any appeal  from            that order, the  only issue before us  is essentially whether            his motion to reopen  was properly denied.  See  Aiyadurai v.                                                        ___  _________            INS,  683  F.2d 1195,  1198-99  (8th  Cir. 1982).    Dawodu's            ___            argument  that he  should not  be deported  because he  had a            valid, approved visa  petition is not relevant to that issue.            Other arguments that Dawodu raises now were  not presented to            the Board and thus are deemed waived.  See Thomas v. INS, 976                                                   ___ ______    ___            F.2d 786, 789 (1st  Cir. 1992).  Finally, the  plain language            of  8  U.S.C.      1252b(c)(3)(A)  forecloses  rescission  of            deportation  orders if a motion to reopen is not timely filed            under  the  statute.    Therefore,  to  the  extent  that the            immigration judge may have believed that he had discretion to            consider Dawodu's motion despite the statutory bar, he erred.                                         -2-                      The petition for review is denied.                      __________________________________                                         -3-
