Abbas v. Holder , 387 F. App'x 383 ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-2066
RANA KHALIFA ELSAYED ABBAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals
Submitted: June 28, 2010 Decided: July 8, 2010
Before GREGORY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James A. Roberts, LAW OFFICE OF JAMES A. ROBERTS, Fairfax,
Virginia, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General, William C. Peachey, Assistant Director, Paul T.
Cygnarowicz, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Rana Khalifa Elsayed Abbas, a native and citizen of
Sudan, petitions for review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from the immigration
judge’s denial of her requests for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Abbas first challenges the determination that she
failed to establish her eligibility for asylum. To obtain
reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an
alien “must show that the evidence [s]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 Abbas fails to show that the evidence compels a
contrary result. We therefore find that substantial evidence
supports the denial of relief.
Additionally, we uphold the denial of Abbas’s request
for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for
withholding of removal is higher than for asylum — even though
the facts that must be proved are the same — an applicant who is
ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding
of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft,
378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because Abbas failed to show
2
that she is eligible for asylum, she cannot meet the higher
standard for withholding of removal.
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
∗
Abbas failed to challenge the denial of her request for
protection under the Convention Against Torture. She has
therefore waived appellate review of this claim. See
Ngarurih v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 182, 189 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004)
(finding that failure to raise a challenge in an opening brief
results in abandonment of that challenge); Edwards v. City of
Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999) (same).
3