Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01218/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01218-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
A.Y.E.G.
Petitioner
William P. Barr
Respondent
Cristina Gonzalez Bautista
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1218

CRISTINA GONZALEZ BAUTISTA; A.Y.E.G.,

 Petitioners,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted: May 22, 2020 Decided: June 1, 2020

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Janeen Hicks-Pierre, PIERRE LAW, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Petitioner. 

Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, 

Thankful T. Vanderstar, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED 

STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1218 Doc: 34 Filed: 06/01/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Cristina Gonzalez Bautista and her minor daughter, both natives and citizens of 

Mexico, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) 

dismissing their appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision denying Gonzalez 

Bautista’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have considered 

Gonzalez Bautista’s claims after thoroughly reviewing the record and conclude that the 

record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the agency’s factual findings, 

see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2018), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s 

decision, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. 

See In re Gonzalez Bautista (B.I.A. Feb. 12, 2019). 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

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1218 Doc: 34 Filed: 06/01/2020 Pg: 2 of 2