Huizi Piao v. Gonzales

*36 MEMORANDUM **

Huizi Piao, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Rostomian v. INS, 210 F.3d 1088, 1089 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision that petitioner failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on the one-child policy or her Falun Gong practice. Because she did not want another child, and testified that she wanted the IUD removed because it was causing health problems, petitioner’s asylum claim fails with regard to political persecution. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42); cf. Li v. Ashcroft, 356 F.3d 1153, 1157, 1160-1161 (9th Cir.2004) (interpreting “other resistance to a coercive population control program” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42) to require resistance to the population policy). Because…