Ontimare

Ontimare v. Ashcroft

Good Law
90 F. App'x 271
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 2004No. 02-72351. Agency No. A75-261-240California262 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jocelyn Dayao Ontimare, a native and citizen on the Philippines, petitions this court for review of the summary affir-mance by the Board of Immigration Appeals of an immigration judge’s denial of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We deny the petition for review. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

The IJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. The harm suffered by Ontimare was not sufficient to constitute past persecution within the meaning of immigration law. Being subjected to a work dress code — the only harm that arguably has a governmental nexus — does not qualify as persecution. Because she did not suffer past persecution, she is not entitled to a presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution under 8 C.F.R. § 208.13 (b)(1). The record supports the IJ’s determination that Ontimare’s testimony and the background materials she submitted did not demonstrate a reasonable possibility that her life or freedom would be threatened by a return to the Philippines. Because Ontimare has failed to establish eligibility for asylum, she has failed to meet…

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.