Case Name: Daniel KAZIBUTOWSKI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-21
Citations: 206 F. App'x 381
Docket Number: No. 05-61045
Parties: Daniel KAZIBUTOWSKI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 206
Pages: 381–381

Head Matter:
Daniel KAZIBUTOWSKI, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 05-61045
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 21, 2006.
Bruce A. Coane, Coane & Associates, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.
Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Linda Susan Wendtland, Saul Greenstein, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Caryl G. Thompson, New Orleans, LA, Sharon A. Hudson, U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services, Houston, TX, for Respondent.
Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service District Directors Office, Washington, DC, pro se.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Daniel Kazibutowski appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) order denying withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and ordering him removed to Venezuela. Kazibutowski challenges only the denial of withholding of removal and has abandoned by failing to brief any challenge to the denial of relief under the CAT. See Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n. 15 (5th Cir.1993).
Kazibutowski argues that the BIA erred in determining that he did not have a well-founded fear of persecution based on his refusal to report for military service. Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that the BIA's determination is supported by substantial evidence and is reasonable. See Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft, 303 F.3d 341, 350 (5th Cir.2002). Kazibutowski has not shown that the evidence compels a finding that he would face persecution on a protected ground if returned to Venezuela. See Girma v. INS, 283 F.3d 664, 667, 669 (5th Cir.2002); see also Jukic v. INS, 40 F.3d 747, 749 (5th Cir.1994); Alonzo v. INS, 915 F.2d 546, 548 (9th Cir.1990). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.