UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-2011
SONG WU LIN,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A73-181-936)
Submitted: April 30, 2007 Decided: May 11, 2007
Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Song Wu Lin, Petitioner Pro Se. Carol Federighi, Kristin Kay
Edison, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Song Wu Lin, a native and citizen of the People’s
Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals denying his applications for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against
Torture. We deny the petition.*
In his petition for review, Lin maintains that he met his
burden of proof for his request 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 (1992). We have reviewed the
evidence of record and conclude that Lin fails to show that the
evidence compels a contrary result.
Additionally, we uphold the denial of Lin’s request for
withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for
withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the
facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who is
ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of
removal.” Camara v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004).
*
As Lin fails to set forth any argument concerning the denial
of protection under the Convention Against Torture, we find that
this claim has been abandoned on appeal. See Yousefi v. INS, 260
F.3d 318, 326 (4th Cir. 2001).
- 2 -
Because Lin fails to show that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot
meet the higher standard for withholding of removal.
Accordingly, though we grant Lin leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, 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 -