UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1456
ZHIQIANG WANG,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted: January 27, 2012 Decided: February 2, 2012
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jim Li, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Tony West Assistant
Attorney General, Derek C. Julius, Senior Litigation Counsel,
Katherine A. Smith, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Zhiqiang Wang, a native and citizen of China,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (Board) denying Wang’s motion to remand and dismissing
his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his
applications for relief from removal.
Wang 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 Wang’s
claims and conclude that Wang fails to show that the evidence
compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum,
Wang 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 conclude
based on our review that the Board did not abuse its discretion
in denying Wang’s motion to remand. See Hussain v. Gonzales,
477 F.3d 153, 155 (4th Cir. 2007).
Accordingly, we 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