Court Opinion

ID: 9890654
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-13 21:00:32.824837+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.572508
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2201      Doc: 25         Filed: 10/12/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-2201

        VERONICA DEL CARMEN LOPEZ-URBINA; M.U.L.,

                            Petitioners,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

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

        Submitted: August 18, 2023                                    Decided: October 12, 2023

        Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Leonel Vasquez, Hyattsville, Maryland, for Petitioners. Brian M. Boynton,
        Acting Assistant Attorney General, Sarah A. Bryd, Senior Litigation Counsel, James A.
        Hurley, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES
        DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2201      Doc: 25        Filed: 10/12/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Veronica Del Carmen Lopez-Urbina and her minor child, natives and citizens of El

        Salvador, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board)

        dismissing Lopez-Urbina’s appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications

        for asylum and withholding of removal. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and

        conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative

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

        denial of relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we

        deny the petition for review. In re Lopez-Urbina (B.I.A. Nov. 1, 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

                                                    2