Bamboukian

Bamboukian v. Gonzales

Good Law
176 F. App'x 752
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 10, 2006No. 04-75523California253 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Haroution Bamboukian, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“U”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We lack jurisdiction to review the determination that petitioner did not meet the one-year deadline and did not qualify for an exception to the deadline for filing his asylum application. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir. 2005). We dismiss the petition on the asylum claim.

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over his remaining claims. 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 and BIA’s denial of petitioner’s withholding of removal claim because he did not show that it was more likely than not that *753 he would be persecuted if returned to Syria. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1184-85 (9th Cir.2003).

Because petitioner failed to show that it was more likely than not…

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.