Jia Lin v. Eric Holder, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
JIA XIU LIN, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
December 16, 2009
December 30, 2009
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gary J. Yerman, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, John S. Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, Todd J. Cochran, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Jia Xiu Lin, a native and citizen of the People's
Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing of his his appeal from the
Against Torture. Lin first challenges the determination that he failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of
a determination denying eligibility for 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 Lin fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. We therefore find that substantial evidence supports
the denial of relief. Additionally, we uphold the denial of Lin's request for withholding of removal. "Because the burden of proof for
withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3)." 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). 2 Camara v. Ashcroft,
Because Lin failed to show
standard for withholding of removal. Finally, we find that substantial evidence supports
the finding that Lin failed to meet the standard for relief under the Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, an
applicant must establish that "it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal." failed court. Accordingly, dispense with oral we deny the petition the for facts review. and We legal to 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009). the requisite showing before We find that Lin the immigration
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?