Case ID: f-appx_83/html/0523-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Tigest TADESSE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Respondent.
    No. 03-1227.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 21, 2003.
    Decided Dec. 17, 2003.
    Douglas P. Wachholz, Wachholz & Associates, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Norah Ascoli Schwarz, Senior Litigation Counsel, Michelle R. Thresher, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Tigest Tadesse, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an immigration judge’s ruling and denying relief on her application for asylum and withholding of removal. We find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s conclusion that Tadesse failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution as necessary to qualify for relief from deportation. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(D) (2000); INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Huarman-Cornelio v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, 979 F.2d 995, 999 (4th Cir.1992). Tadesse’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel claim is pending before the Board in a motion to reopen and reconsider, and we decline to address its merits before the Board has disposed of the motion to reopen. See Stewart v. U.S. INS, 181 F.3d 587, 596 (4th Cir.1999), Figeroa v. U.S. INS, 886 F.2d 76, 77 n. 1 (4th Cir.1989).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We grant Tadesse’s motion for leave to file an attachment to her reply brief. 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