Opinion ID: 3018762
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: standard of review

Text: Where the BIA affirms the IJ’s decision without opinion, we review the decision of the IJ as if it were the decision of the BIA. Zhang v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 150, 155 (3d Cir. 2005). We review the IJ’s denial of relief to determine if the conclusion is supported by substantial evidence. INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). INA § 242(b)(4)(B) provides that “administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Thus, if the applicant “seeks to obtain judicial reversal of the [denial of asylum], he must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable fact finder could fail to find” the requisite likelihood of persecution. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 483-84. “Under this standard, a finding will stand if it is supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence in the record 10 when considered as a whole.” Secaida-Rosales v. INS, 331 F.3d 297, 307 (3d Cir. 2003) (citation and internal quotations omitted). The same standard applies to the BIA’s denial of Ghebrehiwot’s claim for withholding of removal. To reverse the decision below, we must find that the record “not only supports that conclusion, but compels it.” Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 481 n.1. Finally, since the IJ did not make an adverse credibility determination here, we proceed as if the alien’s testimony was credible. Kayembe v. Ashcroft, 334 F.3d 231, 235 (3d Cir. 1003).