Sylvie Nyato v. Eric Holder, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
SYLVIE NYATO, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
August 27, 2009
September 16, 2009
Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Peter Nyoh, PETER NYOH AND ASSOCIATES, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Michael F. Hertz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Jessica Segall, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Sylvie Nyato, a native and citizen of Cameroon, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("Board") dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial of her application under for the asylum, Convention withholding Against of removal, and
challenges the IJ's adverse credibility finding, as affirmed by the Board. For the reasons set forth below, we deny the
petition for review. We will uphold an adverse credibility determination if it is supported by substantial evidence, see Tewabe v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 533, only 538 if (4th the Cir. 2006), "was and so reverse the Board's that no
reasonable fact finder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution." Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Having reviewed the administrative record and the
Board's decision, we find that substantial evidence supports the immigration judge's adverse credibility finding, as affirmed by the Board, and the ruling that Nyato failed to establish past persecution necessary to or a well-founded fear of for future asylum. persecution See 8 as
§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(i), (ii) (2006) (providing that the burden of proof is on the alien to establish eligibility for asylum); 8 2
C.F.R. § 1208.13(a) (2006) (same). Because the record does not compel denial a of different Nyato's result, we will for not disturb the Board's of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. 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?