Mercy Ngeusang v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing 920110307

<

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1676

MERCY NGEUSANG, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted:

February 15, 2011

Decided:

March 7, 2011

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward Neufville, III, MORAISNEUFVILLE LAW FIRM, LLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant Director, Ashley Y. Martin, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Mercy Ngeusang, a native and citizen of Cameroon,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals judge's ("Board") denial of dismissing her her appeal for from the immigration of

requests

asylum,

withholding

removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Before this court, Ngeusang challenges the

determination that she failed to establish her eligibility for relief. She argues that the credibility determination was not

supported by specific and cogent reasoning and that the Board erred in failing to consider the independent corroborative

evidence that she submitted in support of her claims. A determination regarding eligibility for asylum or

withholding of removal is affirmed if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole. Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). INS v. Elias-

Administrative findings of

fact, including findings on credibility, are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to decide to the contrary. reviewed [Board]'s 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2006). de novo, "affording of the appropriate Legal issues are deference and to the

interpretation

[Immigration

Nationality

Act] and any attendant regulations." 517 F.3d 685, 691-92 (4th Cir. 2008). the Board only if "the evidence 2 .

Li Fang Lin v. Mukasey, This court will reverse . . presented was so

compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution." Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at

483-84; see Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002). Furthermore, "[t]he agency decision that an alien is not

eligible for asylum is `conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.'" Marynenka v. Holder, 592

F.3d 594, 600 (4th Cir. 2010) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(D) (2006)). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility

finding. sufficient

We further conclude that Ngeusang failed to present independent the evidence of past persecution, as

notwithstanding

adverse

credibility

determination,

discussed in Camara v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 361, 370 (4th Cir. 2004). We therefore uphold the denial of Ngeusang's requests See id. at 367 ("Because

for asylum and withholding of removal.

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)."). Finally, we find that substantial evidence supports

the finding that Ngeusang failed to meet the standard for relief under the Convention Against Torture. 3 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." Ngeusang 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2010). to make the requisite showing We find that before the

failed

immigration court. 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

4