Case Name: Murshed ALAM, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-17
Citations: 107 F. App'x 61
Docket Number: No. 03-71263, A70-956-108
Parties: Murshed ALAM, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 107
Pages: 61–61

Head Matter:
Murshed ALAM, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 03-71263, [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 9, 2004.
Decided Aug. 17, 2004.
Garish Sarin, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Regional Counsel, Laguna Niguel, CA, CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Esq., Nancy E. Friedman, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Murshed Alam, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' summary affirmance of an immigration judge's ("U") denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). We review for substantial evidence and will not reverse unless the evidence compels a contrary result. Garcia-Martinez v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 1066, 1074 (9th Cir.2004). We deny the petition for review.
We need not review the IJ's adverse credibility finding because even assuming Alam testified credibly, the evidence does not compel the conclusion that members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party ("BNP") persecuted Alam at least in part on account of an enumerated ground. See Elias-Zacarias v. INS, 502 U.S. 478, 482-83, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); cf. Hoque v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1190, 1198 (9th Cir.2004). Likewise, the evidence does not compel the conclusion that Alam's subjective fear of future persecution by members of the BNP and/or the Awami League is on account of an enumerated ground. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 482-83, 112 S.Ct. 812.
Alam's request for judicial notice is granted.
Pursuant to Elian v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 897 (9th Cir.2004) (order), Alam's period of voluntary departure will begin to run upon 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.