Domi v. Gonzales

Second Circuit

Domi v. Gonzales

160 F. App'x 123

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedDecember 30, 2005

DocketNo. 04-2242-AG NAC

StatusPublished

This text of 160 F. App'x 123 (Domi v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Domi v. Gonzales, 160 F. App'x 123 (2d Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 30th day of December, two thousand and five.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED.

Petitioner Artan Domi (“Domi”) petitions for review of an order of the BIA affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) ordering his removal to Albania and denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case.

This Court reviews the agency’s factual findings, including adverse credibility determinations, under the substantial evidence standard. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Jin Hui Gao v. United States Att’y Gen., 400 F.3d 963, 964 (2d Cir.2005); Zhou Yun Zhang v. INS, 386 F.3d 66, 73-79 (2d Cir.2004); Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft, 357 F.3d 169, 178-83 (2d Cir.2004); Secaida-Rosales v. INS, 331 F.3d 297, 306-13 (2d Cir.2003); Diallo v. INS, 232 F.3d 279, 286-88 (2d Cir.2000).

Upon due consideration, it is ORDERED that the petition for review is hereby DENIED because the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence. Having completed our review, the [124]*124stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SUMMARY ORDER

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 30th day of December, two thousand and five.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED.

Petitioner Artan Domi (“Domi”) petitions for review of an order of the BIA affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) ordering his removal to Albania and denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case.

This Court reviews the agency’s factual findings, including adverse credibility determinations, under the substantial evidence standard. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Jin Hui Gao v. United States Att’y Gen., 400 F.3d 963, 964 (2d Cir.2005); Zhou Yun Zhang v. INS, 386 F.3d 66, 73-79 (2d Cir.2004); Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft, 357 F.3d 169, 178-83 (2d Cir.2004); Secaida-Rosales v. INS, 331 F.3d 297, 306-13 (2d Cir.2003); Diallo v. INS, 232 F.3d 279, 286-88 (2d Cir.2000).

Upon due consideration, it is ORDERED that the petition for review is hereby DENIED because the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence. Having completed our review, the [124]*124stay of removal that the Court previously granted in this petition is VACATED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 F. App'x 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/domi-v-gonzales-ca2-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack