UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1671
MINGYING XU; LONGKUI JIN,
Petitioners,
versus
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A98-362-935)
Submitted: January 24, 2008 Decided: February 25, 2008
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jim Li, New York, New York, for Petitioners. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz,
Acting Assistant Attorney General, Blair T. O’Connor, Senior
Litigation Counsel, Jaesa Woods McLin, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Mingying Xu and Longkui Jin, natives and citizens of the
People’s Republic of China, petition for review of an order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing their appeal from
the immigration judge’s order finding them removable and denying
their applications for asylum, withholding from removal and
withholding under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The
Petitioners challenge the Board’s adverse credibility finding and
claim the Board failed to consider the corroborative 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). 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)
(2007). 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) (2007); Gandziami-
- 2 -
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 sufficient evidence supports the Board’s adverse
credibility finding and the record does not compel a different
result. Accordingly, we will not disturb the Board’s denial of the
Petitioners’ applications for asylum and withholding from removal.
Because the Petitioners did not challenge the denial of relief
under the CAT in their brief, the claim is not preserved for
review. See Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6
(4th Cir. 1999).
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 -