F ILED U.S. COURT O F APP EALS EL EV EN TH C IRC UIT Dece mber 1 3, 2005 T HOMA S K. KA HN CLERK [DO NO T PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

N o. 04- 1269 2
BI A N o. A 79- 478- 082 LAZARO AMAYA L A PUENTE, Petitioner,
ve rs us U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, Re spon de nt.

Petition for Reviewof an O rder of the Bo ar d of

I m m igr at ionAppe al s (D ec em be r 13, 200 5) Before DU BIN A and KRA VI TC H, Circuit Judges, and ST ROM *, D istrict Judg e.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ *Honora ble Lyle E. Strom, United States District J udg e for the District of Ne braska , sitti ngby desig nation.2

PE R CU RIA M: Petitioner L azar o Am ay a L a Puente ( “ Am ay a”) petition s for re view of a fi na l or de r of

r em ova l e nte re d by

the Bo ar d of

I m m igr at ionAppe al s ( “ BI A ”)
. T he BI A sum m ar ily a ff irm ed the de ci sio n of

the im m igr at ionj udge [ “ IJ ”] de ny ing A m ay a’ s a

ppl ic at ion s f

or a sy lum , w ith hol din g of

r em ova l un de r the I m

m igr at ion
an d N at ion al ity

A ct ( “ IN A ”) a nd C onve nti on A ga ins t T ortur e (“ CA T ”) , de fe rr al of
re m ova l un de r the CA T , a nd o rd er ing him to be r em ove d f

ro m the U nit ed

S ta te s.

“ Whe n th e BI A sum

m ar ily a ff irm s th e [I J’ s] de ci sio n w ith out a n op ini on, the [IJ’ s] decision becom es the final re m oval order subjec t to review. ” Se pulve da
v. U
. S. A tt’ y G en . , 40 1 F .3d12 26 , 12 30 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). The co ur t re vi ews adm inistrative findin gs of fact under the highly defer ential subs tantial evidence st an da rd
. A de

fe m i v
. A shc rof

t , 38 6 F .3d10 22 , 10 26 -2 7 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 4)
. Ac cordingly , “ finding s of fac t m ade by [the agency ] m ay

be rever sed by

this court
on ly whe n t he reco rdco m pe ls rev ers al
. . . . Id

. a t 10 27. T he c ourt r ev ie w s th e ag en cy ’s in te rp ret at io n o f th e INA de novo , b u td ef er s t o t h e a g en cy’s interpretation “ if it is reasonable.” F arqu hars on v . U

. S. A tt’ y G en . , 246 F
. 3d 1317 , 1320 (11th Cir. 2001). The r ecord dem onstrates that Am ay a is rem ovable as an alien who engaged in a ct ivi ty

to vio la te a ny

lawof the U
. S. r el at ing to es pio na ge . S pe ci fi ca lly , the3

record shows that A m ay a had knowledge of the espionage tactics of the Cuban gove rn m en t and tha t he f ai le d to r eg ist er

w iththe A tto rn ey

G en er al und er

50 U
. S. C. § 85 1. Se co n d , s ub s t an t i al ev i d en ce s up p o rt s d en yin g t h e w i t h h o l d i n g o f A m aya’s
re m ova l a s ape rs ec uto r. I n hi s r ole a s aguard a t the U nit ed

S ta te s I nte re sts Section, A m ay a re vealed the nam es of dissident s and poli tical oppon ents to Cuban
au tho ri tie s. T hir d, sub stanti al e vid en ce sup ports the I J’ s a dve rs e cr ed ibi lity de te rm inatio n. T he re w er e cl earl y m at er ia l i nc onsi ste nc ie s and d isc re panc ie s in A maya ’s t e s t i mo n y. Concerning Am ay a’ s alleged eligibili ty for asy lum

based on a we ll-founded fe ar of f uture pe rs ec uti on i n C uba , the r ec or d do es not sup port tha t any one in Cu ba ha s any int er es t i n A m ay a or

in pe rs ec uti ng h im

on a cc ount

of apr ote ct ed

gr ound
. Fi na lly , the r ec or d is de voi d of a ny c re dib le e vid en ce that i f re tur ne d to Cu ba , A m ay a w ill be tor

tur ed
. Bas edon th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we d en y th e p et it io n fo r rev ie w. PETI TI ON DENI ED.