Case Name: Ayaub SHAKEEL, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-09-03
Citations: 105 F. App'x 951
Docket Number: No. 03-70907
Parties: Ayaub SHAKEEL, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, GOODWIN, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 105
Pages: 951–952

Head Matter:
Ayaub SHAKEEL, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-70907.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 25, 2004.
Decided Sept. 3, 2004.
Steven R. Landaal, Esq., Law Offices of Steven R. Landaal, Santa Monica, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Nancy E. Friedman, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, GOODWIN, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Ayaub Shakeel, a native and citizen of Pakistan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' summary affir manee without opinion under 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(e)(4) of an Immigration Judge's denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of deportation under section 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. One member of the BIA entered the decision of the Board.
We review the decision of the Immigration Judge ("IJ"). The IJ made no express adverse credibility finding. Taking all of the petitioner's testimony as true, we conclude that the harm petitioner suffered does not rise to the level of past persecution and the evidence as a whole does not compel a finding of a well founded fear of future persecution.
In failing to qualify for asylum, Shakeel necessarily failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995 (9th Cir.2003). Because Shakeel presented no evidence that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured upon return to Pakistan, the IJ properly rejected his claim under the Convention Against Torture, See Kamalthas v. Ins, 251 F.3d 1279, 1284 (9th Cir.2001).
The petition for review is 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.