From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yang v. Lynch

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 30, 2015
616 F. App'x 119 (4th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 15-1280

09-30-2015

XIANG YANG, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

Farah Loftus, LAW OFFICE OF FARAH LOFTUS, Los Angeles, California, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Jesse M. Bless, Senior Litigation Counsel, Neelam Ihsanullah, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.


UNPUBLISHED On Petition for Review of An Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Farah Loftus, LAW OFFICE OF FARAH LOFTUS, Los Angeles, California, for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Jesse M. Bless, Senior Litigation Counsel, Neelam Ihsanullah, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Xiang Yang, a native and citizen of the People's Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing her appeal of the Immigration Judge's denial of Yang's requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Yang's merits hearing, her asylum application, and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative findings of fact, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board's decision. 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. See In re: Yang (B.I.A. Feb. 27, 2015). 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


Summaries of

Yang v. Lynch

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Sep 30, 2015
616 F. App'x 119 (4th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Yang v. Lynch

Case Details

Full title:XIANG YANG, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Sep 30, 2015

Citations

616 F. App'x 119 (4th Cir. 2015)