United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 16, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-60264
Summary Calendar
ABD ALRAHMAN AL-MOUSA,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A74-409-240
--------------------
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Abd Alrahman Al-Mousa petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) opinion that affirmed the decision of
the Immigration Judge (IJ) denying him asylum and withholding of
removal. He contends that the IJ erred in finding his testimony
not credible, that he established past persecution by the Syrian
government, and that he has a well-founded fear of persecution if
he is forced to return to Syria. As Al-Mousa does not challenge
the IJ’s denial of his application for withholding of removal,
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 03-60264
-2-
that issue is deemed abandoned. See Calderon-Ontiveros v. INS,
809 F.2d 1050, 1052 (5th Cir. 1986).
We review the IJ’s decision because the BIA summarily
affirmed without opinion and essentially adopted the IJ’s
decision. See Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th Cir.
2002). We will uphold the IJ’s determination that Al-Mousa is
not eligible for asylum if it is supported by substantial
evidence. Faddoul v. INS, 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir. 1994); see
8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) (1970). To reverse the IJ’s determination
that Al-Mousa is not eligible for asylum, he must demonstrate the
evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could
conclude against it. Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78 (5th
Cir. 1994). We will not “review decisions turning purely on the
[IJ's] assessment of the alien petitioner’s credibility.” Chun,
40 F.3d at 78 (quotation and citation omitted).
After careful review of the briefs and the administrative
record, we hold that a reasonable adjudicator would not be
compelled to conclude that Al-Mousa established past persecution
in connection with the 1982 killings in Hama. Moreover, we will
not disturb the IJ’s finding that Al-Mousa’s other assertions of
past persecution and his assertion of fear of future persecution
were incredible. See Chun, 40 F.3d at 78.
PETITION DENIED.