Case Name: Florencio Toribio RAMOS DE LEON; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-01-14
Citations: 120 F. App'x 146
Docket Number: No. 03-74434
Parties: Florencio Toribio RAMOS DE LEON; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: BEEZER, HALL, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 120
Pages: 146–146

Head Matter:
Florencio Toribio RAMOS DE LEON; et al., Petitioners, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-74434.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.
Decided Jan. 14, 2005.
Jorge I. Rodriguez-Choi, Esq., Attorney at Law, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Daniel E. Goldman, Esq., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: BEEZER, HALL, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Florencio Toribio Ramos de Leon, his wife, Edmidia Narcisa Santos Vasquez, and son, Florencio Estuardo Ramos, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming an Immigration Judge's denial of their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the agency's determination that Ramos de Leon failed to establish eligibility for asylum. The evidence in the record was not so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution. See Abedini v. U.S. INS, 971 F.2d 188, 191 (9th Cir.1992). It follows that Ramos de Leon did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (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.