Case ID: f-appx_75/html/0285-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Haleema MISTRY, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-60892.
    Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Sept. 16, 2003.
    Deepa Ajit Thakur, Bellaire, TX, for Petitioner.
    Stacy Paddack, US Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, John Ashcroft, US Department of Justice, Anthony W. Norwood, US Department of Justice, Civil Division Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Hipólito Acosta, US Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, US Immigration & Naturalization Service, District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
    Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Haleema Mistry petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) decision to deny her application for asylum or withholding of deportation. Mistry argues that she has established past persecution and a well-founded fear of future persecution if she were to return to India.

After reviewing the record and the briefs, we conclude that the decision is supported by substantial evidence and that the evidence in the record does not compel a contrary conclusion. See Mikhael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 302-04, 306 (5th Cir.1997); Abdel-Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 584 (5th Cir.1996). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.