Zaka v. Ashcroft , 103 F. App'x 830 ( 2004 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 28, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-60975
Summary Calendar
LEONORA ZAKA,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A78 196 696
--------------------
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Lenora Zaka, a citizen of Albania, petitions for review of
an order from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming
the immigration judge’s (IJ) decision to deny her application for
asylum and withholding of removal.
We review legal conclusions de novo and findings of fact for
substantial evidence. Lopez-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 263 F.3d 442, 444
(5th Cir. 2001). We will reverse the BIA’s asylum determination
only if the evidence compels a different result. Girma v. INS,
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 03-60975
-2-
283 F.3d 664, 669 (5th Cir. 2002); see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502
U.S. 478, 482-84 (1992). The Attorney General may grant asylum
to refugees. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1). A refugee is a person who
is outside of his or her country and is unable or unwilling to
return “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of
persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership
in a particular social group, or political opinion . . . .”
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A).
Based on the IJ’s findings, the BIA concluded that Zaka had
not established past persecution or a well-founded fear of
persecution based on any of the statutorily enumerated grounds.
After reviewing the record and the briefs, we conclude that the
BIA’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and that the
record does not compel a contrary conclusion. Zaka has failed to
show that the Government’s position in her case is inconsistent
with its position in another case pending before the Attorney
General. If Zaka believed that she was entitled to asylum under
proposed rules applicable to victims of domestic violence, she
could have raised this issue prior to the filing of her reply
brief. Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n.15 (5th Cir. 1993).
Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.