Palash D Costa v. Jefferson Sessions, III
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A206-601-790,A206-601-791,A206-601-792,A206-601-793 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [17-1097]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
PALASH BENEDICT D COSTA; MAGDALINA MITHUN D COSTA; A.J.D.;
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: August 22, 2017
Decided: September 6, 2017
Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael E. Piston, New York, New York, for Petitioners. Chad A. Readler, Acting
Assistant Attorney General, Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director, Imran R. Zaidi, Office of
Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Palash Benedict D Costa, Magdalina Mithun D Costa, A.J.D., and A.C.D., natives
and citizens of Bangladesh, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (Board) dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have
thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of the merits hearing before the
immigration court and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does
not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. See
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board.
In re D Costa (B.I.A. Dec. 27, 2017). 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.
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?