Yan Zheng v. Michael Mukasey
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
YAN ZHENG, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
December 8, 2008
December 18, 2008
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Henry Zhang, ZHANG & ASSOCIATES, P.C., New York, New York, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Rebecca Hoffberg, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Yan Zheng, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of her applications for relief from removal. Zheng first challenges the determination that she
failed to establish eligibility for asylum. of a determination denying eligibility for
To obtain reversal relief, an alien
"must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution." (1992). INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84
We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude
that Zheng fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Zheng cannot meet Chen v.
the more stringent standard for withholding of removal.
INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below
that Zheng failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that she would be tortured if removed to China. 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2008). Accordingly, dispense with oral we deny the petition the for facts review. and We legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?