UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1959
XUEBIN CHEN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: October 20, 2010 Decided: November 2, 2010
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent Wong, LAW OFFICES OF VINCENT S. WONG, New York, New
York, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General,
John S. Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, Nicole J.
Thomas-Dorris, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Xuebin Chen, a native and citizen 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
applications for relief from removal.
Chen 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 Chen fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary
result.
Having failed to qualify for asylum, Chen 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 Chen failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not
that he would be tortured if removed to China. 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2010).
We accordingly 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