FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 19 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ASTGHIK HAKOBYAN, No. 08-72555
Petitioner, Agency No. A097-870-384
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 12, 2011 **
Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Astghik Hakobyan, a native of Iran and citizen of Armenia, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Hakobyan’s
request for oral argument is denied.
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We
dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review Hakobyan’s challenge to the IJ’s denial of
CAT relief, her claim based on nationality, and her contention that the IJ violated
due process by failing to include the Department of State’s country report in the
administrative record, because she failed to exhaust these issues before the BIA.
See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
The record does not compel the conclusion that Hakobyan’s encounters with
Armenian authorities rise to the level of persecution. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d
1014, 1019-21 (9th Cir. 2006); Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir. 1995)
(being hit in the stomach, kicked from behind, and questioned during a brief six-
hour detention did not compel a finding of persecution). Additionally, the record
does not compel the conclusion that Hakobyan has a well-founded fear of future
persecution. See Gu, 454 F.3d at 1022 (record did not compel finding a well-
founded fear of persecution where the only evidence of any ongoing interest in
petitioner after he left the country was that authorities sought to interview him
without threatening him or his family in any way). Accordingly, Hakobyan’s
asylum claim fails.
2 08-72555
Because Hakobyan failed to establish eligibility for asylum, she necessarily
failed to meet the higher standard of eligibility for withholding of removal. See
Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
3 08-72555