Xian F. Zhang v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 588 F. App'x 263 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-1497
    XIAN FENG ZHANG,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
    Appeals.
    Submitted:   November 14, 2014              Decided:    December 19, 2014
    Before SHEDD and    THACKER,   Circuit   Judges,       and   DAVIS,   Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Chunyu Jean Wang, WANG LAW OFFICE, PLLC, Flushing, New York, for
    Petitioner.   Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Paul
    Fiorino, Senior Litigation Counsel, Erik R. Quick, 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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
    Xian Feng Zhang, a native and citizen of the People’s
    Republic of China, 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       Zhang’s      merits     hearing,       her
    supporting statement, and her additional evidence.                            We conclude
    that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to
    any   of   the    administrative         findings         of   fact,    see      8    U.S.C.
    § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports
    the adverse credibility finding.                    See Tewabe v. Gonzales, 
    446 F.3d 533
    , 538 (4th Cir. 2006).                      We further conclude that a
    review of Zhang’s independent corroborating evidence does not
    compel a different result.
    Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the
    reasons stated by the Board.                   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: 14-1497

Citation Numbers: 588 F. App'x 263

Filed Date: 12/19/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023