UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2744
JUAN TIMOTEO MONTES,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A70-435-707)
Submitted: May 18, 1999 Decided: July 9, 1999
Before ERVIN and KING, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Laurence F. Johnson, Laura M. Dawkins, JOHNSON & YANG, P.C.,
Wheaton, Maryland, for Petitioner. David W. Ogden, Acting Assis-
tant Attorney General, Joan E. Smiley, Senior Litigation Counsel,
Russell J. E. Verby, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Juan Timoteo-Montes petitions for review of a final order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his application
for asylum and withholding of deportation. Montes first contends
that the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) adverse credibility finding that
was adopted by the Board is not supported by substantial evidence.
After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that substantial
evidence supports the determination that Montes’ account of threats
and beating by the Shining Path lacks credibility and that he
therefore does not qualify for relief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4)
(1994).*
Montes next maintains that the Board’s application of a new
standard to assess the IJ’s credibility finding and its ultimate
acceptance of the IJ’s adverse credibility determination deprived
him of meaningful appellate de novo review. We reject this conten-
tion because the Board properly fulfilled its obligation to conduct
a thorough and independent review of the record and accurately as-
sessed the IJ’s credibility findings. See Matter of A.S., Interim
Decision 3336 (BIA 1998). We accordingly affirm the Board’s order.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
*
We note that 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) was repealed by the
Illegal Immigration Reform Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(IIRIRA), Pub. L. No. 104-128, 110 Stat. 3009, effective April 1,
1997. Because this case was in transition at the time the IIRIRA
was passed, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) is still applicable under the
terms of the transitional rules contained in § 309(c) of the
IIRIRA.
2
tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3