Case ID: f-appx_109/html/0948-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ajay GUPTA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-72025.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 13, 2004.
    
    Decided Sept. 23, 2004.
    Inna Lipkin, Fremont, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Laguna Niguel, CA, Julia K. Doig, Jonathan F. Cohn, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before PREGERSON, T.G. NELSON, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ajay Gupta, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b). We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s determination that Gupta failed to demonstrate he either suffered past persecution or had a well-founded fear of persecution on account of his political opinion or any other protected ground. See Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 861-62, 866-67 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition.

Whether or not Gupta could demonstrate past persecution, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that changed country conditions would allow Gupta to live unmolested in India. See Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 998-99 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.