Ndula v. John Ashcroft , 82 F. App'x 326 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                           UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    ERIC NDULA,                               
    Petitioner,
    v.                                No. 02-2404
    JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    
    On Petition for Review of an Order
    of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
    (A78-580-054)
    Submitted: October 29, 2003
    Decided: December 9, 2003
    Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    COUNSEL
    Bokwe G. Mofor, IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER, Silver Spring,
    Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney Gen-
    eral, Civil Division, Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant Director, Ann
    Carroll Varnon, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division,
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
    D.C., for Respondent.
    2                         NDULA v. ASHCROFT
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Eric S. Ndula, a native and citizen of Cameroon, seeks review of
    a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Immi-
    gration Judge’s (IJ) denial of Ndula’s application for asylum and
    withholding of removal. We reject Ndula’s contention that the evi-
    dence he presented at the hearing before the IJ, in the form of his tes-
    timony, was adequate to establish his entitlement to the relief sought.
    Ndula does not qualify because the IJ made a negative credibility
    determination that is amply supported by the record and is entitled to
    deference. 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    (b)(4) (2000); see Rusu v. INS, 
    296 F.3d 316
    , 323 (4th Cir. 2002).
    Additionally, we uphold the Board’s denial of Ndula’s application
    for withholding of removal. The standard for receiving withholding
    is "more stringent than that for asylum eligibility." Chen v. INS, 
    195 F.3d 198
    , 205 (4th Cir. 1999). An applicant for withholding must
    demonstrate a clear probability of persecution. INS v. Cardoza-
    Fonseca, 
    480 U.S. 421
    , 430 (1987). As Ndula has failed to establish
    refugee status, he cannot satisfy the higher standard for withholding
    of removal.
    Ndula asserts that he seeks to have his case reopened to adjudicate
    his right to protection under the Convention Against Torture. As the
    IJ has already held that Ndula was not entitled to such relief, we con-
    clude that the denial of any such motion to reopen was not an abuse
    of discretion. See 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.2
    (a) (2003); INS v. Doherty, 
    502 U.S. 314
    , 323-24 (1992).
    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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-2404

Citation Numbers: 82 F. App'x 326

Judges: Williams, Traxler, Gregory

Filed Date: 12/9/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024