UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1343
MANG CHRISTIAN NGEMBUS,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A96-087-883)
Submitted: September 17, 2004 Decided: October 26, 2004
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mang Christian Ngembus, Petitioner Pro Se. Emily Anne Radford,
Keith Ian Bernstein, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Mang Christian Ngembus, a native and citizen of Cameroon,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture.
Ngembus challenges the immigration judge’s finding that
his asylum application was untimely because he failed to show by
clear and convincing evidence that he filed his application within
one year of the date of his arrival in the United States. See 8
U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B) (2000). We conclude that we lack
jurisdiction to review this claim pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3)
(2000). See Zaidi v. Ashcroft, 377 F.3d 678, 680-81 (7th Cir.
2004) (collecting cases). Given this jurisdictional bar, we cannot
review the underlying merits of Ngembus’s asylum claim.
While we lack jurisdiction to consider the immigration
judge’s denial of Ngembus’s asylum claim, we retain jurisdiction to
consider the denial of his requests for withholding of removal and
protection under the Convention Against Torture. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.4(a) (2004). “To qualify for withholding of removal, a
petitioner must show that he faces a clear probability of
persecution because of his race, religion, nationality, membership
in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Rusu v. INS,
296 F.3d 316, 324 n.13 (4th Cir. 2002) (citing INS v. Stevic, 467
- 2 -
U.S. 407, 430 (1984)). To qualify for protection under the
Convention Against Torture, a petitioner bears the burden of proof
of demonstrating that “it is more likely than not that he . . .
would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.”
8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2004). Based on our review of the
record, we find that Ngembus has failed to meet these standards.
Accordingly, we deny Ngembus’s 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 -