Case ID: f-appx_80/html/0869-02.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

Asif BARYALAI, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-2390.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 26, 2003.
    Decided Nov. 17, 2003.
    
      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.
    Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

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