Artunduaga

Artunduaga v. Gonzales

Good Law
135 F. App'x 105
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 2005No. 03-73469; Agency Nos. A79-092-312, A79-092-313, A79-092-314California329 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Rosa Virginia Artunduaga and her two sons, Carlos Ivan Cuaraca and Alejandro Cuaraca, natives and citizens of Colombia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the IJ’s decision for substantial evidence and may reverse only if 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). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Artunduaga failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. Although Artunduaga testified that she received threatening phone calls and notes, because she could not identify who sent the notes or why they were sent, or who the callers were, and she offered no evidence showing that any mistreatment occurred based on an enumerated ground, substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum. See id. at 481-82 , 112 S.Ct. 812 (holding that guerrilla group’s attempt to…

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.