Vakhob Valiyevich Abdullayev v. Eric Holder, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
VAKHOB VALIYEVICH ABDULLAYEV, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
January 13, 2010
January 27, 2010
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vakhob Valiyevich Abdullayev, Petitioner Pro Se. George William Maugans, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; William Charles Peachey, Tyrone Sojourner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Vakhob Valiyevich Abdullayev, a native and citizen of Uzbekistan, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of his applications for relief from removal. Abdullayev first challenges the determination that he 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). that INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84
We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude fails to show that the to evidence compels a
withholding of removal.
Chen v. 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 Abdullayev failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Uzbekistan. (2009). Accordingly, dispense with oral we deny the petition the for facts review. and We legal 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2)
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?