Case ID: f-appx_642/html/0204-02.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

Edwin Antonio MIRANDA-MENDEZ, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 15-2117.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 15, 2016.
    Decided: March 22, 2016.
    John E. Gallagher, Catonsville, Maryland, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, John S. Hogan, Assistant Director, Todd J. Cochran, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before NIEMEYER and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Edwin Antonio Miranda-Mendez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his requests for asylum and withholding of removal. We have reviewed the administrative record, including the transcript of Miranda-Mendez’s merits hearing, the applications for relief, and all sup-' porting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative findings of fact, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We accordingly deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Mirandar-Mendez (B.I.A. Aug. 25, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ■ adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED.