UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1893
HAYDAR AHMED ABD ALLA,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN D. ASHCROFT, United States Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A79-497-412)
Submitted: March 19, 2004 Decided: April 16, 2004
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James A. Roberts, LAW OFFICES OF JAMES A. ROBERTS, Falls Church,
Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney
General, David J. Kline, Principal Deputy Director, Hugh G.
Mullane, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Haydar Ahmed Abd Alla, a native and citizen of Sudan,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) summarily affirming the immigration judge’s
denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture.
On appeal, Alla challenges the immigration judge’s
determination that he failed to establish 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 conclude that Alla fails to show that the
evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we cannot grant
the relief that Alla seeks.
Additionally, we uphold the immigration judge’s denial of
Alla’s applications for withholding of removal and protection under
the Convention Against Torture. To qualify for withholding of
removal, an applicant must demonstrate “a clear probability of
persecution.” INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430-31 (1987).
To obtain relief under the Convention Against Torture, an applicant
must establish that “it is more likely than not that he or she
would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.”
- 2 -
8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2003). We conclude that Alla has failed
to meet either one of these standards.
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
- 3 -