UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

VICTOR MANUEL GALICIA-ARRIAZA,

Petitioner,

v.

No. 98-2569

U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION

SERVICE,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

(A70-674-820)

Submitted: April 27, 1999

Decided: May 28, 1999

Before ERVIN, WILKINS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

John William O'Leary, JOHN O'LEARY & ASSOCIATES, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. David W. Ogden, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, David M. McConnell, Assistant Director,

Earle B. Wilson, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES

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

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Galicia-Arriaza seeks a review of the decision of the Board of

Immigration Appeals (Board) denying relief on his application for

asylum and withholding of deportation. The Board's determination

that Galicia-Arriaza is not eligible for asylum must be upheld if the

determination is "supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative

evidence on the record considered as a whole." 8 U.S.C.A.

§ 1105a(a)(4) (West 1994). The decision may be reversed only if the

evidence presented by Galicia-Arriaza was such that a reasonable fact

finder would have to conclude that the requisite fear of persecution

existed. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). The

Board concluded that Galicia-Arriaza failed to meet his burden of

proving a well-founded fear of persecution on account of protected

grounds if he were returned to El Salvador. Our review of the record

discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence

and is without reversible error.

Although the Board did not specifically address Galicia-Arriaza's

claim that he will be a target for persecution because of his family

membership, much of the Board's reasoning also applies to this claim.

Even if Galicia-Arriaza's family were at one time the specific target

of guerrilla attacks, Galicia-Arriaza has failed to establish that he has

a reasonable fear of such persecution if returned to El Salvador or that

a different region of El Salvador is unavailable to him for relocation

in order to avoid conflict. Furthermore, the record does not establish

that he warrants a discretionary grant of asylum arising solely from

the severity of past persecution based upon membership in his family

unit. While the repeated threats against Galicia-Arriaza and the one

physical attack he experienced as a civilian were, as the Board found,

"reprehensible," they do not form a sufficient basis for a grant of asylum arising solely from the severity of past persecution. See Baka v.

INS, 963 F.2d 1376, 1379 (10th Cir. 1992) (quoting Rivera-Cruz v.

 2
INS, 948 F.2d 962, 969 (5th Cir. 1991)) (holding that to establish such

eligibility, an alien must show past persecution so severe that repatriation would be inhumane).

Because Galicia-Arriaza failed to show entitlement to asylum, he

cannot meet the higher standard for withholding deportation. See INS

v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430-32 (1987).

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 3