UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1155
TEWODROS G. ABAYNEH,
Petitioner,
v.
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals
Submitted: October 16, 2008 Decided: November 17, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Solomon Bekele, LAW OFFICES OF SOLOMON & ASSOCIATES, Silver
Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant
Attorney General, Daniel E. Goldman, Senior Litigation Counsel,
Paul T. Cygnarowicz, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tewodros G. Abayneh, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his
applications for relief from removal.
Abayneh first challenges the 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 have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude
that Abayneh fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary
result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Abayneh cannot
meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal.
Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v.
Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally, we uphold
the finding below that Abayneh failed to demonstrate that it is
more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to
Ethiopia. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2008).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3