Opinion
22-1716
03-20-2023
GELVER VASQUEZ CHILEL, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner. Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Song Park, Senior Litigation Counsel, Brandon T. Callahan, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: March 16, 2023
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
ON BRIEF:
Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner.
Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Song Park, Senior Litigation Counsel, Brandon T. Callahan, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Gelver Vasquez Chilel, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge's oral decision denying Vasquez Chilel's applications for asylum and withholding of removal.[ *] Upon review of the administrative record in conjunction with the arguments advanced in this court, we are satisfied that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. In re Vasquez Chilel (B.I.A. June 10, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
[*] Vasquez Chilel does not challenge the denial of his request for protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Accordingly, this issue is waived. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A); Cortez-Mendez v. Whitaker, 912 F.3d 205, 208 (4th Cir. 2019) (explaining that petitioner's failure to address the denial of CAT relief waives the issue).