Tafese Didi v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A089-157-129 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998437868] [10-1026]

Tafese Didi v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Doc. 0

Case: 10-1026 Document: 35

Date Filed: 10/04/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1026 TAFESE GEMEDA DIDI, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: September 16, 2010 Decided: October 4, 2010

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Israel W. Gobena, GOBENA & ASSOCIATES, Saint Paul, Minnesota, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant Director, Roseanne M. Perry, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-1026 Document: 35

Date Filed: 10/04/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Tafese Gemeda Didi, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's

denial of his applications for relief from removal. Didi first challenges the determination that he failed to establish eligibility for asylum. determination denying eligibility for To obtain reversal of a 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 Didi fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Didi 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). Next, we uphold the finding below

that Didi failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Ethiopia. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2010). 8 C.F.R.

Finally, we find no abuse of discretion

in the Board's denial of Didi's motion to remand the case to the Immigration Judge. (4th Cir. 2005). 2 See Obioha v. Gonzales, 431 F.3d 400, 408

Case: 10-1026 Document: 35

Date Filed: 10/04/2010

Page: 3

Accordingly, dispense with oral

we

deny

the

petition the

for facts

review. and

We legal

argument

because

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED

3