Case ID: f-appx_176/html/0385-01.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

Lise Adriani KOHA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Respondent.
    No. 05-2267.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted March 31, 2006.
    Decided April 18, 2006.
    Howard T. Mei, Law Offices of Howard T. Mei, Bethesda, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Diane Kelleher, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, 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    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Lise Adriani Koha, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion the immigration judge’s decision denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal and withholding under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition for review.

The INA authorizes the Attorney General to confer asylum on any refugee. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a) (2000). It defines a refugee as a person unwilling or unable to return to her native country “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (2000). Substantial evidence supports the finding that Koha failed to show entitlement to asylum because the past events that were the basis for her asylum application did not establish persecution.

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 
      
       We note Koha has abandoned challenges to the immigration judge's decision that she was not eligible for withholding from removal or withholding under the CAT. She did not raise challenges to these findings in her brief.