Court Opinion

ID: 9556612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-17 21:01:27.175756+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:17.392618
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1932      Doc: 27         Filed: 08/16/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1932

        IRIS BANESSA VASQUEZ-RIVERA; M.E.V.V.; A.V.V.V.,

                            Petitioners,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

        On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                        Decided: August 16, 2023

        Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Victor E. Legorreta, Michael E. Rosado, LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL E.
        ROSADO, P.C., Laurel, Maryland, for Petitioners. Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy
        Assistant Attorney General, Edward E. Wiggers, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jessica
        Newman, Law Clerk, A. Ashley Arthur, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division,
        UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1932      Doc: 27          Filed: 08/16/2023   Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Iris Banessa Vasquez-Rivera and her two minor children, M.E.V.V. and A.V.V.V.,

        natives and citizens of Honduras, petition for review of a final order of the Board of

        Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying their applications for asylum, withholding of

        removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.           After thoroughly

        reviewing the record, we are satisfied that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary

        to the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial

        evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination and the denial of relief,

        see Herrera-Alcala v. Garland, 39 F.4th 233, 244–45 (4th Cir. 2022). Accordingly, we

        deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. In re Vasquez-Rivera

        (B.I.A. Aug. 8, 2022).       We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

        contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                             PETITION DENIED