Edgar Mota-Braga v. Jefferson Sessions III
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A202-149-082 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Edgar Mota-Braga 2709 Cedar Chase Drive Matthews, NC 28105. [17-1521]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: September 22, 2017
Decided: September 27, 2017
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edgar Mota-Braga, Petitioner Pro Se. Sabatino Fioravante Leo, Office of Immigration
Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Edgar Mota-Braga, a native and citizen of Brazil, petitions for review of an order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s decision denying his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including
the transcript of Mota-Braga’s 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 Mota-Braga (B.I.A. Mar. 24, 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?