Mohamed

Mohamed v. Gonzales

Good Law
126 F. App'x 879
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 25, 2005No. 03-70993; Agency No. A75-617-410California378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ****

We lack jurisdiction to review the Immigration Judge’s determination that Mohamed’s asylum application is time barred and accordingly we dismiss the petition for review as to the asylum claim.

We review for substantial evidence the Immigration Judge’s decision to deny withholding of removal. 2 There is not substantial evidence showing that it is more likely than not that Mohamed would be persecuted if he returned to Bangladesh. 3 The violence of which Mohammed alleges he was a victim, decades ago when he was a student, is not enough to show that it is more likely than not he will be persecuted if he returns to Bangladesh.

Mohamed has also failed to show that it is more likely than not he would be tortured if he were removed to Bangladesh, and thus does not qualify for withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture. 4 He has not shown that he was *880 tortured in the past, nor has he shown any likelihood that he would be tortured if he returned to Bangladesh.

Mohamed is not statutorily eligible for cancellation of removal because he failed to establish ten years of continuous physical presence. 5 Because his passport indicates absences in the…

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.