Guenev

Guenev v. Ashcroft

Good Law
102 F. App'x 610
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 2004Nos. 02-70816, 02-74025; Agency No. A70-701-519, A73-413-555California253 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Dimitar Jekov Guenev and Larissa G. Gueneva, natives and citizens of Bulgaria and Russia, respectively, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmances of an Immigration Judges’ (“IJ”) denials of their applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to former 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), see Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJs’ findings in each case that Guenev and Gueneva have failed to establish persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of an enumerated ground. See Melkonian v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 1061, 1066 (9th Cir.2003).

By failing to qualify for asylum, Guenev necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir.2003). The IJ in Gueneva’s case granted withholding of deportation to Bulgaria, but ordered her deported to Russia if she fails to voluntarily depart. By failing to qualify for asylum, Guenev fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation to Russia. See…

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.