Kazeem v. Gonzales

Filing 920070202

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT February 2, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-60174 Summary Calendar ADEKUNLE ABOLAJI KAZEEM, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. -------------------Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A78 133 054 -------------------Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Adekunle Abolaji Kazeem (Kazeem), a citizen of Nigeria,

petitions this court for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) adopting and affirming the immigration judge's decision denying his application for withholding of

removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and his request for voluntary departure. provided sufficient evidence to Kazeem contends that he his burden of proof

sustain

regarding his application for withholding of removal.

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

*

No. 06-60174 -2This court reviews "the BIA's factual conclusion that an alien is not eligible for withholding of [removal] only to determine whether it is supported by substantial evidence." I.N.S., 905 F.2d 833, 838 (5th Cir. 1990). Zamora-Morel v. The substantial

evidence standard requires that the decision be affirmed unless "the evidence compels a contrary conclusion." Carbajal-Gonzalez v. I.N.S., 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996); see also I.N.S. v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). Kazeem fails to show that substantial evidence supports the conclusion that he has suffered past persecution or will more than likely suffer persecution if he is returned to Nigeria. See 8

C.F.R. § 208.16(b); Majd v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 590, 594 (5th Cir. 2006). Kazeem has abandoned the issues regarding the denial of his applications for asylum, voluntary departure, and relief under the CAT by failing to brief the issues in his petition for review. See

Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS, 809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir. 1986). Accordingly, Kazeem's petition for review is DENIED.