Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Khatib v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Fatma Juma Khatib's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court found that the Board's decision affirming the immigration judge's discretionary denial of asylum was not contrary to law or an abuse of discretion. The court also found that substantial evidence supported the immigration judge's findings and that the evidence was not so compelling as to warrant a different conclusion. Finally, the court found no error in the Board's summary affirmance of the decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-07-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-2439

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Fatma Juma Khatib's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court found that the Board's decision affirming the immigration judge's discretionary denial of asylum was not contrary to law or an abuse of discretion. The court also found that substantial evidence supported the immigration judge's findings and that the evidence was not so compelling as to warrant a different conclusion. Finally, the court found no error in the Board's summary affirmance of the decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views2 pages

    Khatib v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Fatma Juma Khatib's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court found that the Board's decision affirming the immigration judge's discretionary denial of asylum was not contrary to law or an abuse of discretion. The court also found that substantial evidence supported the immigration judge's findings and that the evidence was not so compelling as to warrant a different conclusion. Finally, the court found no error in the Board's summary affirmance of the decision.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-2439

    FATMA JUMA KHATIB,


    Petitioner,
    versus
    JOHN ASHCROFT, U. S. Attorney General,
    Respondent.

    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration


    Appeals. (A78-597-045)

    Submitted:

    May 24, 2004

    Decided:

    July 13, 2004

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Richard S. Bromberg, LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD S. BROMBERG,


    Washington, D.C., for Petitioner.
    Peter D. Keisler, Assistant
    Attorney General, Donald E. Keener, Deputy Director, Francis W.
    Fraser, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
    OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Fatma Juma Khatib, a native and citizen of Tanzania,
    petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
    Appeals

    (Board)

    affirming

    the

    immigration

    judges

    decision

    denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and


    withholding under the Convention Against Torture.

    We deny the

    petition for review.


    We find the Boards decision affirming the immigration
    judges discretionary decision that Khatib was not eligible for
    asylum was not manifestly contrary to the law or an abuse of
    discretion.

    See 8 U.S.C. 1252(b)(4)(D)(2000).

    We further find

    substantial evidence supports the immigration judges findings. We


    do not find the evidence so compelling that it warrants a different
    conclusion.

    Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002).

    Finally,
    affirmance.

    we

    find

    no

    error

    in

    the

    Boards

    summary

    See In re Burbano, 20 I. & N. 872, 874 (BIA 1994).

    We deny the petition for review.

    We dispense with oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


    presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.

    PETITION DENIED

    - 2 -

    You might also like