Case Name: Shabana Azmin ALI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-15
Citations: 212 F. App'x 701
Docket Number: No. 05-74989
Parties: Shabana Azmin ALI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 212
Pages: 701–702

Head Matter:
Shabana Azmin ALI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-74989.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 4, 2006.
Filed Dec. 15, 2006.
Judith Lott, Newark, CA, for Petitioner.
Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Kristin K. Edison Fax, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Jocelyn M. Wright, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Shabana Azmin Ali, a native and citizen of Fiji, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") affirmance of an Immigration Judge's denial of her application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA's decision that petitioner failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution because she did not flee Fiji to seek asylum, she experienced only harassment while living in Fiji as opposed to persecution, and there is no evidence in the record to support an objectively reasonable fear of persecution. See Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995); see also Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1016 (9th Cir.2003). Accordingly, we deny petitioner's asylum claim.
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.