Nizametdinov v. Ashcroft

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-2124
ABDUALI NIZAMETDINOV,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A78-603-350)
Submitted: April 7, 2004 Decided: April 16, 2004
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian E. Mezger, LAW OFFICE OF BRIAN E. MEZGER, ESQUIRE, Bethesda,
Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney
General, Norah Ascoli Schwarz, Senior Litigation Counsel,
Michelle R. Thresher, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil
Division, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Abduali Nizametdinov, a native of China and citizen of
Uzbekistan, petitions for review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals affirming without opinion the immigration
judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of
removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture.
Nizametdinov challenges the immigration judge’s negative
credibility finding. We have thoroughly reviewed the record in
light of the immigration judge’s findings and conclude that
Nizametdinov’s assertions are without merit. The immigration judge
cited specific, cogent reasons for concluding that Nizametdinov’s
testimony was not credible. Figeroa v. INS, 886 F.2d 76, 78 (4th
Cir. 1989). As the negative credibility determination is supported
by the record and is entitled to deference, Nizametdinov does not
qualify for the relief sought. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4) (2000); see
Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 323 (4th Cir. 2002).
The standard for eligibility for withholding of removal
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 Nizametdinov failed
to establish entitlement to asylum, he cannot satisfy the higher
standard for withholding of removal.
- 2 -
To obtain relief under the Convention Against Torture, an
applicant must establish that “it is more likely than not that he
or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of
removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2003). Nizametdinov’s
evidence does not support such a conclusion.
We accordingly 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
- 3 -