Court Opinion

ID: 9390158
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-26 21:01:26.833948+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:31.839440
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1540      Doc: 26         Filed: 04/25/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1540

        ELIZABETH CASTRO-DE GARCIA; A.E.G.C.; MAURO GARCIA-TORRES,

                            Petitioners,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

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

        Submitted: March 14, 2023                                         Decided: April 25, 2023

        Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Andrew Barreto, GOREN & BARRETO, Silver Spring, Maryland, for
        Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Stephen J.
        Flynn, Assistant Director, Jessica R. Lesnau, 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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 22-1540      Doc: 26         Filed: 04/25/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Elizabeth Castro-De Garcia, Mauro Garcia-Torres, and their minor child, natives

        and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration

        Appeals (Board) dismissing their appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of their

        applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention

        Against Torture. 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

        for the reasons stated by the Board. In re Castro-De Garcia (B.I.A. Apr. 18, 2022). We

        deny the emergency motion for stay pending appeal and 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