IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-60119

Summary Calendar

IMERI LULZIM,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A088173269

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Petitioner Imeri Lulzim, (Imeri), a citizen of Yugoslavia, applied for

asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against

Torture (CAT). He based his applications on his persecution for being a member

of a social group comprising those persons living in Kosovo who were not of pure

Albanian descent. On appeal, Imeri does not challenge the denial of his

application for CAT relief so this claim is abandoned. See Thuri v. Ashcroft, 380

F.3d 788, 793 (5th Cir. 2004).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

January 28, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-60119 Document: 00511364335 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/28/2011
No. 10-60119

Imeri’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal were denied

based on the determination that the conduct he described in his testimony and

narrative statement did not rise to the level of persecution. We review the

factual findings of the immigration court for substantial evidence, and we review

legal issues de novo. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 593-94 (5th Cir. 2007). In

our review of factual rulings, we must determine “not only that the evidence

supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it.” Chen v.

Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotations and citation

omitted).

Although morally reprehensible, the intermittent incidents of threats and

harassment by armed masked men described in detail by Imeri did not produce

any physical harm to him or result in his significant detention or imprisonment.

His testimony does not reflect that those persons engaged in extreme conduct

that deprived him of the essentials of life. Abdel-Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 583

(5th Cir. 1996). Thus, the evidence presented by Imeri is not so compelling as

to mandate a finding contrary to the conclusion that he was not subjected to

persecution. See Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F3d 182, 187 n.4 (5th Cir. 2004).

Because Imeri failed to carry his burden of showing past persecution, a

presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution does not arise. See 8

C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1). Thus, the evidence does not support a determination that

the case should be remanded for consideration whether the government rebutted

the presumption that Imeri possesses a reasonable fear of future persecution.

Imeri makes a brief argument that a showing of past persecution may give

rise to eligibility for withholding of removal. To demonstrate entitlement to

withholding of removal, a petitioner must establish a clear probability of

persecution. Chen, 470 F.3d at 1138. As this is a higher burden than for

asylum, a petitioner’s failure to establish entitlement to asylum necessarily

defeats a claim for withholding of removal on the same grounds. Id. Because

Imeri has not shown either persecution or a well founded fear of persecution, as

2

Case: 10-60119 Document: 00511364335 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/28/2011
No. 10-60119

is necessary to obtain asylum, he has not shown a “clear probability” of

persecution as is required by the more stringent standard for withholding of

removal. Id. The evidence presented by Imeri does not compel a determination

that he is entitled to withholding of removal.

As the decision of the BIA is supported by substantial evidence in the

recordhe, Imeri’s petition for review is DENIED.

3

Case: 10-60119 Document: 00511364335 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/28/2011