Case Name: Shousong CHI, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-15
Citations: 670 F. App'x 448
Docket Number: No. 11-71605
Parties: Shousong CHI, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, FARRIS, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 448–449

Head Matter:
Shousong CHI, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 11-71605
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted October 19, 2016 Honolulu, Hawaii
November 15, 2016
Jisheng Li, Law Office of Jisheng Li, Honolulu, HI, for Petitioner.
John M. McAdams, Jr., OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: WALLACE, FARRIS, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Shousong Chi, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We review the agency's factual findings for substantial evidence. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency's conclusion that Chi did not establish that his past harm rose to the level of persecution. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1020-21 (9th Cir. 2006). Substantial evidence also supports the agency's conclusion that Chi did not establish an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution. Id. at 1022. Thus, Chi's asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.