Imran Gaya v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A097-485-203,A097-485-204,A097-485-207 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999505049].. [14-1308]

Appeal: 14-1308

Doc: 27

Filed: 01/06/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1308

IMRAN ARIF GAYA; ZAHIDA IMRAN; MARYAM GAYA,
Petitioners,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.

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

Submitted:

November 5, 2014

Before DUNCAN
Circuit Judge.

and

DIAZ,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

January 6, 2015

DAVIS,

Senior

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Karen H. Pennington, LAW OFFICE OF KAREN H. PENNINGTON, Dallas,
Texas, for Petitioners.
Joyce R. Branda, Acting Assistant
Attorney General, Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director, Lynda A.
Do, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1308

Doc: 27

Filed: 01/06/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Imran Arif Gaya, and his wife and daughter, petition
for

review

of

an

order

of

the

Board

of

Immigration

Appeals

(“Board”) dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s
(“IJ”) decision denying their requests for asylum, withholding
of

deportation,

and

Torture (“CAT”). 1
of Pakistan.

withholding

under

the

Convention

Against

Gaya and his family are natives and citizens

The Board found that the IJ’s adverse credibility

finding was not clearly erroneous.

The Board also agreed with

the IJ that Gaya did not establish past persecution or a wellfounded fear of persecution, independent of his past persecution
claim.

We note that Gaya’s brief does not contain arguments and

contentions challenging the Board’s conclusion that he is not
entitled to the presumption that he has a well-founded fear of
persecution,

with

citations

Thus, the claim is abandoned. 2

to

authorities

and

the

record.

See Suarez-Valenzuela v. Holder,

714 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th Cir. 2013); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9).
We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the testimony
offered

by

Gaya

and

his

expert

witness,

and

conclude

that

1

Gaya’s wife and daughter participate in this petition as
derivative beneficiaries to Gaya’s claims for relief.
2

We also note that Gaya does not challenge the denial of
protection under the CAT.
Accordingly, that claim is also
abandoned.

2

Appeal: 14-1308

Doc: 27

Filed: 01/06/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that Gaya did
not establish that he has a well-founded fear of persecution
independent of his claim that he suffered past persecution.
INS v. Elias Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992).
record

does

asylum.

not
See

substantial

compel
8

a

U.S.C.

evidence

finding

that

Gaya

§ 1252(b)(4)(B)

supports

the

finding

is

See

Thus, the
eligible

for

(2012).

Because

that

is

Gaya

not

eligible for asylum, he is also not eligible for withholding of
removal.

Camara v. Holder, 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004).

We also conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion in
denying Gaya’s motion to remand.

See Hussain v. Gonzales, 477

F.3d 153, 155 (4th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly,
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

we

deny

argument

adequately

the

petition

because

presented

in

the
the

for
facts

review.

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

3