Court Opinion

ID: 9381135
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 21:01:15.004022+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:30.149302
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1716      Doc: 19         Filed: 03/20/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1716

        GELVER VASQUEZ CHILEL,

                            Petitioner,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

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

        Submitted: March 16, 2023                                         Decided: March 20, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner. Brian M.
        Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Song Park, Senior Litigation
        Counsel, Brandon T. Callahan, Trial Attorney, 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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 22-1716      Doc: 19         Filed: 03/20/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Gelver Vasquez Chilel, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an

        order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the immigration

        judge’s oral decision denying Vasquez Chilel’s applications for asylum and withholding

        of removal. ∗ Upon review of the administrative record in conjunction with the arguments

        advanced in this court, we are satisfied that the record 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 Vasquez Chilel (B.I.A. June 10, 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

               ∗
                Vasquez Chilel does not challenge the denial of his request for protection under
        the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Accordingly, this issue is waived. See Fed. R.
        App. P. 28(a)(8)(A); Cortez-Mendez v. Whitaker, 912 F.3d 205, 208 (4th Cir. 2019)
        (explaining that petitioner’s failure to address the denial of CAT relief waives the issue).

                                                     2