Noory v. Gonzales , 159 F. App'x 521 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1252
GULAM SAMAD NOORY,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A78-425-643)
Submitted: October 17, 2005 Decided: December 27, 2005
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion
Michael E. Hadeed, Miguel Rodriquez Rivera, BECKER, HADEED, KELLOGG
& BERRY, P.C., Springfield, Virginia, for Petitioner. Paul J.
McNulty, United States Attorney, Anita C. Snyder, Assistant United
States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Gulam Samad Noory, a native and citizen of Afghanistan,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his
applications for asylum and withholding of removal.
To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility
for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was
so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the
requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S.
478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and
conclude that Noory fails to show that the evidence compels a
contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Noory cannot
meet the higher standard to qualify for withholding of removal.
Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v.
Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987).
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 the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -