Court Opinion

ID: 9352611
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-09 00:00:38.839128+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:00:53.540704
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-60128        Document: 00516601724             Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/06/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit                                    United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                    Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                                 FILED
                                                                            January 6, 2023
                                      No. 22-60128
                                                                             Lyle W. Cayce
                                    Summary Calendar
                                                                                  Clerk
                                    ____________

   Vijay Kumar,

                                                                                 Petitioner,

                                            versus

   Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,

                                                                               Respondent.
                     ______________________________

                        Petition for Review of an Order of the
                            Board of Immigration Appeals
                              Agency No. A209 157 570
                     ______________________________

   Before Davis, Smith, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Vijay Kumar, a native and citizen of India, timely petitions us for re-
   view of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his past and
   future persecution asylum claims.
         On petition for review of a BIA decision, this court reviews factual
   findings for substantial evidence and questions of law de novo. Lopez-Gomez

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-60128       Document: 00516601724         Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/06/2023

                                    No. 22-60128

   v. Ashcroft, 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). The substantial-evidence
   standard applies to review of decisions denying asylum, withholding of
   removal, and relief under the CAT. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th
   Cir. 2005). This standard requires that the BIA’s conclusion be based on the
   evidence presented and that its decision be substantially reasonable. Id.
   Under this standard, reversal is improper unless the evidence compels a
   contrary conclusion. Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir.
   1996).
            We are not compelled to find that the harm Kumar experienced in the
   past is persecution. See Gjetani v. Barr, 968 F.3d 393, 397 (5th Cir. 2020); see
   also Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 816 (5th Cir. 2017). To the extent he
   argues that the Board did not consider psychological harm, this argument is
   unexhausted. See Lopez-Dubon v. Holder, 609 F.3d 642, 644 (5th Cir. 2010).
   The fear of future persecution arguments are also unexhausted. Id.
            DENIED in part, DISMISSED in part.

                                          2