Sow Mint A. Vall v. Eric Holder, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
AMINETOU MINT WEHBINE SOW MINT A. VALL, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
March 27, 2009
April 14, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kell Enow, ENOW & PATCHA, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, Michelle Gorden Latour, Assistant Director, Joseph A. O'Connell, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Aminetou Mint Wehbine Sow Mint A. Vall, a native and citizen of Mauritania, 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. Sow Mint A. Vall 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 Sow Mint A. Vall fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Sow Mint
A. Vall cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999);
INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). 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?