Court Opinion

ID: 9398566
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-31 18:01:52.723961+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:34.636846
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-60449         Document: 00516769174             Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/31/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                                    FILED
                                                                                  May 31, 2023
                                       No. 22-60449
                                     Summary Calendar                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                      Clerk
                                     ____________

   Jaivanti Kumari; Pooja Sharma; Sahil Sharma; Simran
   Sharma,

                                                                                Petitioners,

                                             versus

   Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,

                                                                               Respondent.
                      ______________________________

                         Petition for Review of an Order of the
                             Board of Immigration Appeals
                      Agency Nos. A205-362-600, A205-362-602,
                             A205-362-603, A205-362-604
                      ______________________________

   Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Petitioners Jaivanti Kumari and Pooja Sharma, 1 natives and citizens of
   Pakistan, request our review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
          1
            The Petitioners are a mother (Kumari), her two minor children, and her adult
   daughter (Sharma). The minors are derivatives on Kumari’s application.
Case: 22-60449     Document: 00516769174          Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/31/2023

                                   No. 22-60449

   (BIA) dismissing their appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of their
   application for asylum and withholding of removal.
         We review for substantial evidence and will not disturb the BIA’s
   decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Zhang v.
   Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and
   citation omitted). Petitioners fail to present such evidence. The harms
   alleged do not show past persecution. See Gjetani v. Barr, 968 F.3d 393, 397
   (5th Cir. 2020). Petitioners also have not shown error in connection with the
   BIA’s conclusions that they did not have an objectively reasonable fear of
   future persecution and could avoid harm by relocating within Pakistan. See
   Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 193 (5th Cir. 2003); Zhao v. Gonzales, 404
   F.3d 295, 308 (5th Cir. 2005). Past persecution or a likelihood of future
   persecution is an essential element of claims for asylum or withholding of
   removal. Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir. 2002); Jaco v. Garland,
   24 F.4th 395, 402 (5th Cir. 2021). Petitioners fail to show that the evidence
   compels a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s ruling on their eligibility for
   asylum or withholding of removal. See Jaco, 24 F.4th at 402; Efe, 293 F.3d at
   906; INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976). We thus need not consider
   their remaining arguments.
          The petition for review is DENIED.

                                        2