Caroline Githua v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 552 F. App'x 249 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-1667
    CAROLINE WANJIKU GITHUA,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
    Appeals.
    Submitted:   January 9, 2014                 Decided:   January 27, 2014
    Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    P. Mercer Cauley, THE CAULEY LAW       FIRM, PLLC, Charlotte, North
    Carolina, for Petitioner.   Stuart    F. Delery, Assistant Attorney
    General, Luis E. Perez, Senior        Litigation Counsel, Linda Y.
    Cheng,   Office   of   Immigration      Litigation,  UNITED  STATES
    DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,    D.C., for Respondent.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Caroline     Wanjiku         Githua,        a     native       and      citizen    of
    Kenya,    petitions    for       review      of    an        order       of    the     Board   of
    Immigration    Appeals      (“Board”)        dismissing            her     appeal      from    the
    immigration     judge’s          denial      of        her    requests           for       asylum,
    withholding    of    removal       and     withholding             under      the    Convention
    Against    Torture.         We    have     thoroughly             reviewed       the       record,
    including the transcript of Githua’s hearing and her supporting
    evidence.     We conclude that the record evidence does not compel
    a ruling contrary to the Board’s dismissal and that substantial
    evidence supports the finding that Githua did not establish an
    objectively reasonable well founded fear of persecution.                                    See 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    (b)(4)(B) (2012); INS v. Elias–Zacarias, 
    502 U.S. 478
    , 481 (1992).
    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
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-1667

Citation Numbers: 552 F. App'x 249

Judges: Duncan, Keenan, Motz, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 1/27/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023