Julio Melendez Lizama v. Loretta Lynch


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A206-181-224. Copies to all parties and the agency. [1000152906]. [16-2033]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2033 Doc: 35 Filed: 09/11/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2033 JULIO ERNESTO MELENDEZ LIZAMA, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted: August 30, 2017 Decided: September 11, 2017 Before SHEDD, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. John T. Riely, Rockville, Maryland, for Petitioner. Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, Janice K. Redfern, Senior Litigation Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-2033 Doc: 35 Filed: 09/11/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Julio Ernesto Melendez Lizama, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s denial of his requests for asylum and withholding of removal. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Melendez Lizama’s merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the agency’s factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re Melendez Lizama (B.I.A. Aug. 9, 2016). 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 2

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?