Case Name: Hass Anali NUCCKIE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-08
Citations: 115 F. App'x 337
Docket Number: No. 03-71965
Parties: Hass Anali NUCCKIE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 337–338

Head Matter:
Hass Anali NUCCKIE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-71965.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
Decided Dec. 8, 2004.
Ahmed M. Abdallah, Esq., Attorney at Law, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Hass Anali Nucckie, a native and citizen of Fiji, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") decision affirming an immigration judge's denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of deportation. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We review for substantial evidence the denial of asylum, and will uphold the BIA's decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA's decision that the incidents described by Nucckie do not rise to a level of past persecution. Nucckie admits that he was never arrested, detained or physically harmed. See Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA's decision that Nucckie did not establish an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution should he return to Fiji. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 967 (9th Cir.1998).
Because Nucckie failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he necessarily fails to meet the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 961 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc).
Pursuant to Elian v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 897 (9th Cir.2004) (order), Nucekie's voluntary departure period will begin to run on the issuance of this court's mandate.
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.