Case ID: f-appx_231/html/0348-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ali Hussain VIRANI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 05-60863
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    June 15, 2007.
    Sarfraz Aftab Sharif, Sharif & Associates, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.
    Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, John Clifford Cunningham, John S. Hogan, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Caryl G. Thompson, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, Sharon A. Hudson, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, Houston, TX, for Respondent.
    Alberto R. Gonzales, Washington, DC, pro se.
    Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Ali Hussain Virani petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s decision to deny his application for withholding of removal under both the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Virani argues that the BIA erred in determining that he had not established past persecution based on his political affiliation or that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he were returned to Pakistan. He contends that he established his eligibility for withholding of removal under both the INA and the CAT by adducing evidence that he was arrested because of his political activities and that he was beaten and deprived of food while incarcerated.

The record evidence in the instant case does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s determination that Virani was not entitled to withholding of removal under the INA. See Chun v. INS, 40 F.3d 76, 78-79 (5th Cir.1994). The record evidence also fails to establish that Virani has a reasonable fear of future persecution based on his political associations, especially because he is no longer a member of the PML. See Faddoul v. INS, 37 F.3d 185, 188 (5th Cir.1994).

Virani’s CAT claim is also without merit, as he has failed to show that he will likely be tortured if he is returned to Pakistan. See Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 907 (5th Cir.2002). Virani’s 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.