Mina Khalil v. Loretta Lynch


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A206-123-533 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000013851].. [16-1678]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1678 Doc: 25 Filed: 01/31/2017 Pg: 1 of 5 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1678 MINA ABDELMASEH ABDELSHAHED KHALIL, Petitioner, v. DANA JAMES BOENTE, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: January 24, 2017 Decided: January 31, 2017 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Saher J. Macarius, Audrey Botros, LAW OFFICE OF SAHER J. MACARIUS, Framingham, Massachusetts, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, William C. Minick, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-1678 Doc: 25 Filed: 01/31/2017 Pg: 2 of 5 PER CURIAM: Mina Abdelmaseh Abdelshahed Khalil, a native and citizen of Egypt, petitions Immigration for Appeals review (Board) of an order dismissing his of the appeal Board of from the immigration judge’s (IJ) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT). protection under the For the reasons set forth below, we deny the petition for review. The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) vests in the Attorney General the discretionary aliens who qualify as refugees. 265, 272 (4th Cir. 2011). or unwilling to return power to grant asylum to Djadjou v. Holder, 662 F.3d A refugee is someone “who is unable to” his native country “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (2012). An asylum applicant has the burden of proving that he satisfies the definition of a refugee to qualify for relief. F.3d at 272. Djadjou, 662 He may satisfy this burden by showing that he was subjected to past persecution or that he has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of a protected ground. § 208.13(b)(1) (2016). If the applicant See 8 C.F.R. establishes past persecution, he has the benefit of a rebuttable presumption of a well-founded fear of persecution. 2 Djadjou, 662 F.3d at 272. Appeal: 16-1678 Doc: 25 Filed: 01/31/2017 Pg: 3 of 5 If the applicant is unable to establish that he was the victim of past persecution, he must establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. A well-founded fear of persecution has a subjective and objective component. 592 F.3d 594, 600 (4th Cir. 2010). Marynenka v. Holder, The subjective component requires the applicant to show a genuine fear of persecution. The objective component requires the applicant to show with specific and concrete facts that a reasonable person in like circumstances would fear persecution. Id. An applicant faces a heightened burden of proof to qualify for withholding of removal to a particular country under the INA because he must show a clear probability account of a protected ground. the applicant cannot of persecution Djadjou, 662 F.3d at 272. demonstrate asylum eligibility, on If his application for withholding of removal will necessarily fail as well. Id. Because the Board “issued its own opinion without adopting the IJ’s opinion . opinion of the IJ.” Cir. 2014). manifestly Djadjou, . . we review that opinion and not the Martinez v. Holder, 740 F.3d 902, 908 (4th We will uphold the Board’s decision unless it is contrary 662 F.3d to at the 273. law and The an abuse standard of of discretion. review of the agency’s findings is narrow and deferential. Factual findings are evidence. affirmed if supported by 3 substantial Id. Appeal: 16-1678 Doc: 25 Filed: 01/31/2017 Pg: 4 of 5 “Substantial evidence exists to support a finding unless the evidence was such that any reasonable adjudicator would have been compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). An adverse credibility determination, as was made in this case, must be supported by specific, cogent reasons. 662 F.3d at statements, testimony 273. We recognize contradictory are evidence, appropriate inconsistencies, sufficient for the Id. to inconsistent inherently for making improbable an adverse The existence of only a few omissions, agency omissions, and reasons credibility determination. such that Djadjou, or make contradictions an adverse can be credibility determination as to the applicant’s entire testimony regarding past persecution. Id. at 273-74. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility finding and that Khalil’s corroborating evidence was insufficient to support his asylum claim. conclude that substantial evidence supports the We also finding that Khalil did not show a pattern or practice of persecuting Coptic Christians. Because Khalil did not establish eligibility for asylum, he is also ineligible for withholding of removal. at 272. Id. Because Khalil fails to challenge the Board’s finding that he waived review of the denial of protection under the CAT, he has waived review in this court. 4 See Tiscareno-Garcia v. Appeal: 16-1678 Doc: 25 Filed: 01/31/2017 Pg: 5 of 5 Holder, 780 F.3d 205, 210 (4th Cir. 2015); Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 5

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?