Cheng Lin v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A073-077-804 Copies to all parties and the agency. [999153256].. [12-2276]

Appeal: 12-2276

Doc: 35

Filed: 07/18/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2276

CHENG BO LIN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.

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

Submitted:

June 18, 2013

Decided:

July 18, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Oleh R. Tustaniwsky, Brooklyn, New York, for
Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Senior Litigation Counsel, Surell Brady, Office of
Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
D.C., for Respondent.

Petitioner.
Song Park,
Immigration
Washington,

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-2276

Doc: 35

Filed: 07/18/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Cheng Bo Lin, a native and citizen of the People’s
Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board
of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the
Immigration

Judge’s

withholding

of

order

removal

denying

and

his

protection

applications

under

the

for

Convention

Against Torture (CAT).
Lin first disputes the conclusion that he failed to
qualify for the relief of withholding of removal.

“Withholding

of removal is available under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) if the alien
shows that it is more likely than not that her life or freedom
would be threatened in the country of removal because of her
race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social
group, or political opinion.”
359

(4th

Cir.

2009)

§ 1231(b)(3) (2006).
and

conclude

that

Gomis v. Holder, 571 F.3d 353,

(citations

omitted);

see

8

U.S.C.

We have reviewed the administrative record
substantial

evidence

supports

the

agency’s

adverse credibility determination as well as its finding that
Lin

failed

persecution.

to

demonstrate
Because

the

a

clear

evidence

probability
does

not

of

compel

future
us

conclude to the contrary, we uphold the denial of relief.

to
See

Djadjou v. Holder, 662 F.3d 265, 273 (4th Cir. 2011), cert.
denied, 133 S. Ct. 788 (2012).

Finally, we uphold the finding

below that Lin failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than
2

Appeal: 12-2276

Doc: 35

Filed: 07/18/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

not that he would be tortured if removed to China.

8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2013).
We
dispense

accordingly

with

contentions

are

oral

deny

argument

adequately

the

petition

because

presented

in

the
the

for

review.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

3