Baryalai v. Ashcroft , 80 F. App'x 869 ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-2390
ASIF BARYALAI,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A77-246-624)
Submitted: August 26, 2003 Decided: November 17, 2003
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michel M. Hadeed, Jr., BECKER, HADEED, KELLOGG & BERRY, P.C.,
Springfield, Virginia, for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, John C. Cunningham, Senior Litigation
Counsel, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Asif Baryalai, a native and citizen of Afghanistan, petitions
for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(“Board”). The order affirmed, without opinion, the immigration
judge’s order denying Baryalai’s applications for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against
Torture.
The decision to grant or deny asylum relief is conclusive
“unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.”
8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(D) (2000). We conclude that the record
supports the immigration judge’s conclusion that Baryalai failed to
establish his eligibility for asylum. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(a)
(2003); Gonahasa v. INS, 181 F.3d 538, 541 (4th Cir. 1999). As the
decision in this case is not manifestly contrary to law, we cannot
grant the relief that Baryalai seeks.
Accordingly, 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
2