¶1 Utuh Rahardja Putra, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board), affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s ruling finding Putra removable and denying his motion for a third continuance of his removal proceeding pending adjudication of his labor certification application. On appeal, Putra challenges the denial of a third continuance.
¶2 “The immigration judge may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29 (2006). Whether to grant such a motion “is within the sound discretion of the immigration judge and is reviewed for abuse of discretion only.” Onyeme v. INS, 146 F.3d 227, 231 (4th Cir.1998). Based on the materials before us, we find no abuse of discretion in the denial of Putra’s motion for a third continuance.
¶3 Accordingly, we 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.
¶4 PETITION DENIED.