UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1737
SYED ASHAIR ALI,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: December 16, 2011 Decided: January 4, 2012
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John E. Gallagher, Catonsville, Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony
West, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant
Director, Jennifer Paisner Williams, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Syed Ashair Ali, a native and citizen of Pakistan,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s order denying his applications for asylum, withholding
from removal and withholding under the Convention Against
Torture (“CAT”). Because Ali has forfeited review of the
adverse credibility finding and the denial of relief under the
CAT, we deny the petition for review.
Ali’s applications for asylum and withholding from
removal were denied because Ali was found to be not credible and
because he failed to submit reasonably available corroborative
evidence. In his opening brief, Ali fails to challenge the
adverse credibility finding, focusing instead on the finding
that he lacked sufficient corroborative evidence. Under Rule 28
of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, “the argument
[section of the brief] . . . must contain . . . appellant’s
contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the
authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant
relies.” Furthermore, the “[f]ailure to comply with the
specific dictates of [Rule 28] with respect to a particular
claim triggers abandonment of that claim on appeal.” Edwards v.
City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999); see
also Ngarurih v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 182, 189 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004)
2
(failure to challenge the denial of relief under the CAT results
in abandonment of that challenge).
Because Ali does not challenge the adverse credibility
finding with citations to authorities or parts of the record, it
is waived and will not be reviewed by this court. Similarly,
the denial of relief under the CAT is also waived for the same
reason. We have reviewed the independent evidence and conclude
that the record does not compel a different result. See INS v.
Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992) (This court will
reverse the Board only if “the evidence . . . presented was so
compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the
requisite fear of persecution.”).
Because Ali has waived review of the adverse
credibility finding and our review of the record does not compel
us to reach a different result, 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