Ibrahim Naofal v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

444 F. App'x 146
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 19, 2011·No. 08-71852·Unpublished

Opinion

*147 MEMORANDUM **

Ibrahim Naofal, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 788, 742 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Naofal failed to demonstrate the beating he endured was on account of a protected ground, including his religion. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (to reverse the agency’s finding “we must find that the evidence not only supports that conclusion, but compels it”) (emphasis in original); see also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir.2009) (“[t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected ground represent ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”). Accordingly, Nao-fal’s withholding of removal claim fails. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir.2005).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

Ibrahim Naofal v. Eric H. Holder Jr., 444 F. App'x 146 (9th Cir. 2011).

444 F. App'x 146 (Ibrahim Naofal v. Eric H. Holder Jr.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Doctor John's v. Wahlen
542 F.3d 787 (Tenth Circuit, 2008)
Parussimova v. Mukasey
555 F.3d 734 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)