Villarroel-Vargas v. Ashcroft , 117 F. App'x 897 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 04-1684
    ORLANDO VILLARROEL-VARGAS,
    Petitioner,
    versus
    JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
    Appeals. (A79-157-731)
    Submitted:   December 10, 2004             Decided:   January 5, 2005
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Marc Seguinot, SEGUINOT LAW FIRM, McLean, Virginia, for Petitioner.
    Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal,
    Assistant Director, Margaret K. Taylor, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION
    LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Orlando     Villarroel-Vargas,            a   native     and      citizen     of
    Bolivia,   petitions      for   review       of     an   order    of    the     Board    of
    Immigration     Appeals   (“Board”)         affirming,     without        opinion,      the
    immigration     judge’s    denial      of     his    applications         for    asylum,
    withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against
    Torture.
    In his petition for review, Villarroel-Vargas challenges
    the immigration judge’s determination that he failed to establish
    his eligibility for asylum.           To obtain reversal of a determination
    denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the
    evidence   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 Villarroel-Vargas
    fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result.
    Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief that he seeks*
    and 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
    *
    Villarroel-Vargas  does   not  challenge   the  denial   of
    withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against
    Torture in his petition for review.
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-1684

Citation Numbers: 117 F. App'x 897

Judges: Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Shedd, Williams

Filed Date: 1/5/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023