Dardan Shoshi v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 519 F. App'x 249 ( 2013 )

Case: 12-60462 Document: 00512218768 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/24/2013
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 24, 2013
No. 12-60462
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
DARDAN SHOSHI,
Petitioner
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A088 017 740
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Dardan Shoshi, a native and citizen of Serbia and Montenegro, petitions
this court for review of an order from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
vacating the immigration judge’s grant of his application for asylum and
ordering his removal. In his application seeking asylum or withholding of
removal, he asserted that his family was verbally threatened by ethnic
Albanians multiple times because his father had worked with the Serbians for
25 years and that, after he left Kosovo, ethnic Albanians shot at his father and
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
Case: 12-60462 Document: 00512218768 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/24/2013
No. 12-60462
uncle on one occasion and kidnapped his father and uncle for several days on
three other occasions.
Shoshi argues that, based upon the persecution of his family members, he
has established a well-founded fear of future persecution. He may not rely solely
upon the treatment of his family members to support his asylum claim. See Arif
v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 677, 681 n.15 (5th Cir. 2007). Moreover, the
reasonableness of Shoshi’s fears of future persecution is diminished because
Shoshi’s family members continue to live unharmed in Kosovo. See Eduard v.
Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 193 (5th Cir. 2004). He has therefore failed to show that
“the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could
fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” Jukic v. INS, 40 F.3d 747, 749 (5th
Cir. 1994). As Shoshi failed to satisfy the asylum standard, he cannot meet the
more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Eduard, 379 F.3d at186 n.2.
His petition for review is DENIED.
2