Flores

Flores v. Ashcroft

Good Law
61 F. App'x 510
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 2003No. 02-70630; INS No. A70-803-390California322 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner concedes deportability but argues that he is entitled to asylum. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) found that Petitioner had not suffered past persecution based on a protected statutory ground and, further, that Petitioner did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. We review for substantial evidence and must uphold the BIA’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

*511 The BIA was not compelled to find that Petitioner suffered past persecution. He lost his government job and was barred from future government employment because he led an allegedly illegal strike of air traffic controllers. He testified that persons unknown threatened him by telephoning his parents about four times per year. He also testified that someone “nearly” tried to abduct him, but he was neither followed nor harmed when he left the scene. These incidents do not rise to the level of persecution. See, e.g., Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that, although the petitioner had received death threats and had been followed, and although a number of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.