FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YAN CHEN, No. 06-75191
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-741-107
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 16, 2010 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Yan Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum and withholding
*
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).
PR/Research
of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence, Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th Cir. 2003), and
we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that the family
planning officials’ attempts to arrest Chen for trying to marry while under the legal
age did not establish past persecution, see id. at 1016, and she did not demonstrate
an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution based on her opposition to
China’s family planning policies or her illegal departure from China, see id. at
1018; see also Li v. INS, 92 F.3d 985, 988 (9th Cir. 1996) (“Criminal prosecution
for illegal departure is generally not considered to be persecution.”). Accordingly,
Chen’s asylum claim fails.
Because Chen did not establish eligibility for asylum, it necessarily follows
that she did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of
removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
PR/Research 2 06-75191