Case Name: YING SONG LIN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-07-27
Citations: 234 F. App'x 175
Docket Number: No. 06-2258
Parties: YING SONG LIN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 234
Pages: 175–176

Head Matter:
YING SONG LIN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 06-2258.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 18, 2007.
Decided: July 27, 2007.
Fengling Liu, Law Office of Fengling Liu, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Neil R. White, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondent.
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Ying Song Lin, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.
To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien "must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution." INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Lin fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Lin cannot meet the higher standard to qualify for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.
PETITION DENIED.