UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-2240
YONG HUAN WU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: June 30, 2009 Decided: July 16, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Khagendra Gharti-Chhetry, CHHETRY & ASSOCIATES, P.C., New York,
New York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney
General, Daniel E. Goldman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jonathan
Robbins, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Yong Huan Wu, a native and citizen of the People’s
Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board
of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the
immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention
Against Torture.
Before this court, Wu challenges the determination
that he failed to establish his 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 Wu fails to show that the evidence
compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we find that
substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum relief.
Additionally, we uphold the denial of Wu’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 under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft,
378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because Wu failed to show
2
that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher
standard for withholding of removal.
We also find that substantial evidence supports the
finding that Wu failed to meet the standard for relief under the
Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, an applicant
must establish that “it is more likely than not that he or she
would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of
removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009). We find that Wu
failed to make the requisite showing before the immigration
court.
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