Hurtado Castillo v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Lesliee Armida Hurtado Castillo petitions for review of the Board of Immigra *587 tion Appeals’ (“BIA’s”) denial of her requests for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture, and voluntary departure. We dismiss the petition in part and deny it in part.
We must review the decision of the district court under the substantial evidence standard. See INS v. Elias-Zacharias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 & n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).
Having considered the record as a whole, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the immigration judge’s (“IJ’s”) determination that Hurtado Castillo did not suffer past persecution. The harassment she endured on the one occasion she was followed was less severe than the harassment other asylum applicants have suffered in cases in which this court has upheld findings of “no past persecution.” See, e.g., Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 923-33, 936-37 (9th Cir.2000) (upholding a determination of “no past persecution” when an asylum applicant was threatened with death, followed, and put on a death list, notwithstanding the killings of colleagues who had received similar threats).