Case ID: f-appx_100/html/0988-01.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

Mane ALI-MAHMOUD, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-60564.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    June 17, 2004.
    Sonseere Henton Goldenberg, Minneapolis, MN, for Petitioner.
    Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Washington, DC, Luis Garcia, El Paso, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, New Orleans, LA, Barbara L. Herwig, Mark W. Pennak, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    John Ashcroft, Washington, DC, pro se.
    Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Mane Ali-Mahmoud (Ali) petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his administrative appeal of the immigration judge’s decision to deny her application for asylum and withholding of removal. Although she also argues that she was entitled to relief under the Convention against Torture and on humanitarian grounds, and contends that the Government wrongly refused to join her motion to reopen the administrative case, she has not exhausted her administrative remedies as to these claims and they will not be reviewed here. See Wang v. Ashcroft, 260 F.3d 448, 452 (5th Cir.2001).

Ali contends that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in concluding that the harm that she suffered in Somalia was not “on account of’ her membership in the Tomal clan. We have reviewed the record and the briefs and conclude that Ali has not established that the ruling should be overturned. Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir.1996). Ali also has not established that she is entitled to withholding of removal. Faddoul v. INS, 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir.1994). 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.