UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-1603
BIRIKTY KEBEDE KEFLU,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A98-317-936)
Submitted: November 20, 2006 Decided: February 6, 2007
Before MICHAEL and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rev. Uduak J. Ubom, UBOM LAW GROUP, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for
Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Carol
Federighi, Ian R. Conner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Birikty Kebede Keflu, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”)
order dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s order
denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal and
withholding under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Keflu
claims she is eligible for asylum and the immigration judge’s
decision was not supported by the evidence.* We deny the petition
for review.
The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) authorizes
the Attorney General to confer asylum on any refugee. 8 U.S.C.
§ 1158(a) (2000). The INA defines a refugee as a person unwilling
or unable to return to her native country “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) (2000). “Persecution involves
the infliction or threat of death, torture, or injury to one’s
person or freedom, on account of one of the enumerated grounds
. . . .” Li v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 171, 177 (4th Cir. 2005)
(internal quotation marks and citations omitted). An applicant can
establish refugee status based on past persecution in her native
country on account of a protected ground. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)
*
Keflu does not challenge the denial of withholding of removal
or withholding under the CAT.
- 2 -
(2006). Without regard to past persecution, an alien can establish
a well-founded fear of persecution on a protected ground.
Ngarurih v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 182, 187 (4th Cir. 2004).
An applicant has the burden of demonstrating her
eligibility for asylum. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(a) (2006); Gandziami-
Mickhou v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2006). A
determination regarding eligibility for asylum is affirmed if
supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a
whole. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). This
court will reverse the Board “only if the evidence presented was so
compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the
requisite fear of persecution.” Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325
n.14 (4th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks and citations
omitted).
We find Keflu failed to show she was persecuted on
account of a protected ground or because of an imputed political
opinion. We further find the evidence was not so compelling as to
warrant a different result. 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 -