Case Name: Etsehiwot EJIGU, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-07-02
Citations: 68 F. App'x 470
Docket Number: No. 03-1111
Parties: Etsehiwot EJIGU, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 68
Pages: 470–471

Head Matter:
Etsehiwot EJIGU, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-1111.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 19, 2003.
Decided July 2, 2003.
Larry L. Lewis, Law Office of J.W. Nesari, L.L.C., Herndon, Virginia, for Petitioner. Robert D. McCallum, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Anthony W. Norwood, Senior Litigation, Efthimia S. Pilitsis, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Etsehiwot Ejigu, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge's denial of asylum and withholding of removal.
Ejigu takes issue with the Immigration Judge's finding that she failed to qualify for asylum due to past persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution in Ethiopia based on her Amhara ethnicity and membership in the All Amhara People's Organization. She further contends that she demonstrated a pattern or practice of persecution of similarly situated individuals in Ethiopia. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(2)(iii) (2008). We have reviewed the administrative record and uphold the IJ's denial of relief. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4) (2000); see Sevoian v. Ashcroft, 290 F.3d 166, 176 (3d Cir.2002); Matter of Y-B-, 21 I. & N. Dec. 1136, 1139 (BIA 1998); Matter of S-M-J- 21 I. & N. Dec. 722, 724-26 (BIA 1997).
We accordingly deny the petition for review. We further deny Ejigu's motion to remand and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.