Elahi v. William Barr
This text of Elahi v. William Barr (Elahi v. William Barr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-1073
AZHAR ELAHI,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: May 20, 2019 Decided: May 30, 2019
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KING, Circuit Judge, and DUNCAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Azhar Elahi, Petitioner Pro Se. Judith Roberta O’Sullivan, Jane Tracey Schaffner, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Azhar Elahi, a native and citizen of Pakistan, petitions for review of an order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration
Judge’s denial of his request withholding of removal. * We have thoroughly reviewed the
record, including the transcript of Elahi’s merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We
conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the
agency’s factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial
evidence supports the Board’s decision, 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.
See In re Elahi (B.I.A. Dec. 20, 2018). 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
* Elahi does not challenge the denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture. While he does assert that he qualified for asylum, he declined to pursue asylum in immigration court and failed to exhaust the asylum issue before the Board. Accordingly, the issue of asylum is barred from judicial review for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2012); Massis v. Mukasey, 549 F.3d 631, 638-40 (4th Cir. 2008).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Elahi v. William Barr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elahi-v-william-barr-ca4-2019.