From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Melendez-Calderon v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Aug 27, 2024
No. 23-2068 (4th Cir. Aug. 27, 2024)

Opinion

23-2068

08-27-2024

PAOLA VANESSA MELENDEZ-CALDERON, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.

Eric R. Suarez, Sanabria & Associates, PLLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Nancy E. Friedman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Brooke M. Maurer, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: August 20, 2024

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

ON BRIEF:

Eric R. Suarez, Sanabria & Associates, PLLC, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner.

Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Nancy E. Friedman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Brooke M. Maurer, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before Gregory and Thacker, Circuit Judges, and Keenan, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM.

Paola Vanessa Melendez-Calderon, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge's denial of Melendez-Calderon's applications for asylum and withholding of removal.[*] We have reviewed the record and Melendez-Calderon's claims and conclude that the 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. In re Melendez-Calderon (B.I.A. Sept. 15, 2023). 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

[*] Melendez-Calderon also challenges the denial of protection under the Convention Against Torture, a claim she failed to exhaust before the Board. Because the Attorney General has properly invoked the exhaustion requirement specified in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1), we decline to consider this argument. See Santos-Zacaria v. Garland, 598 U.S. 411, 413, 419 (2023); Trejo Tepas v. Garland, 73 F.4th 208, 213-14 (4th Cir. 2023).


Summaries of

Melendez-Calderon v. Garland

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Aug 27, 2024
No. 23-2068 (4th Cir. Aug. 27, 2024)
Case details for

Melendez-Calderon v. Garland

Case Details

Full title:PAOLA VANESSA MELENDEZ-CALDERON, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Aug 27, 2024

Citations

No. 23-2068 (4th Cir. Aug. 27, 2024)