Diego Del Castillo-Restrepo v. U.S. Atty. Gen. , 148 F. App'x 876 ( 2005 )

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
September 14, 2005
No. 05-10547
THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
Agency Nos. A95-534-279
& A95-534-280
DIEGO DEL CASTILLO-RESTREPO,
ELIZABETH MALAGAN-MANRIQUE,
ALEJANDRO DEL CASTILLO-MALAGAN,
SEBASTIAN DEL CASTILLO-MALAGAN,
Petitioners,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
_________________________
(September 14, 2005)
Before CARNES, MARCUS and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Deigo Del Castillo-Restrepo petitions for review of the final order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals, which affirmed, without opinion, the denial of
Castillo’s request for political asylum and withholding of removal under the
Immigration and Nationality Act. Because substantial evidence supports the
decision that Castillo failed to establish either past persecution or a well-founded
fear of persecution, we deny his petition.
I. STANDARD OF REVIEW
When the Board of Immigration Appeals expressly adopts the Immigration
Judge’s opinion, we review the IJ’s opinion “as if it were the BIA’s.” Nreka v.
U.S. Att’y Gen., 408 F.3d 1361, 1368 (11th Cir. 2005). We review the decision of
the IJ under the substantial evidence standard. Mazariegos v. Office of U.S. Att’y
Gen., 241 F.3d 1320, 1323-24 (11th Cir. 2001). This standard is highly
deferential. Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001). “[W]e
view the record evidence in the light most favorable to the agency’s decision and
draw all reasonable inferences in favor of that decision.” Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386
F.3d 1022, 1027 (11th Cir. 2004) (en banc), cert. denied, 544 U.S. ___, 125 S. Ct.
2245 (2005). “[F]indings of fact made by . . . the [IJ] may be reversed by this
[C]ourt only when the record compels a reversal; the mere fact that the record may
support a contrary conclusion is not enough to justify a reversal of the
2
administrative findings.” Id. Castillo “must show that the evidence he presented
was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find” in his favor.
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S. Ct. 812, 817 (1992).
II. DISCUSSION
An applicant may apply for asylum, and the Attorney General may grant that
application, if the applicant is a “refugee.” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(A). The
applicant for asylum must be unwilling or unable to return to a country “because of
[past] persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of . . .
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Id. §
1101(a)(42)(A); see also Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1284. The IJ must be presented
with “detailed facts” that support an applicant’s fear that he will be “singled out”
because of one of those protected statutory factors. Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1287.
Substantial evidence supports the determination that Castillo was not entitled
to asylum. Although Castillo twice was confronted by men associated with the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) who threatened Castillo and
solicited his agricultural expertise for purposes related to their own agricultural
projects, Castillo never was physically harmed. Castillo and his family received
numerous threats over the phone, but “persecution is an extreme concept, requiring
more than a few isolated incidents of verbal harassment or intimidation, and . . .
3
mere harassment does not amount to persecution.” Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,
401 F.3d 1226, 1231 (11th Cir. 2005), superseding 378 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2004)
(internal quotations and citation omitted). Substantial evidence supports the
finding that Castillo failed to establish past persecution.
Substantial evidence also supports the finding that Castillo failed to establish
a well-founded fear of persecution. Although a nephew of Castillo was murdered
while Castillo was being harassed by the FARC, Castillo offered little evidence of
why, or by whom, his nephew was murdered. After the murder, Castillo traveled
to and from the United States several times without requesting political asylum.
After his initial confrontation with the FARC, Castillo also returned to Columbia
on several occasions for various reasons, including to “try to establish [himself]
again in Columbia.”
Castillo also cannot satisfy the higher burden of proof required to establish
grounds for withholding of removal. “Where an applicant is unable to meet the
well-founded fear standard for asylum, he is generally precluded from qualifying
for . . . withholding of [removal].” Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1292-93 (internal
quotations and citation omitted).
PETITION DENIED.
4