Opinion of the Court — Hwara v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: May 29, 2002
Case: Hwara v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

MEMORANDUM ** Moufak Al Hwara, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Because the transitional rules apply, this court has jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1183 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). We deny the petition. We review the BIA’s factual determinations under the substantial evidence standard. Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1429 (9th Cir.1995). We must uphold the BIA’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary result. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). The record does not compel the conclusion that the ill treatment A1 Hwara suffered rose to the level of persecution. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 967-69 (9th Cir.1998). The record also does not compel the conclusion that Al Hwara’s fear of persecution on account of his religion is objectively reasonable. See Kazlauskas v. INS, 46 F.3d 902, 905 (9th Cir.1995). Therefore, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Al Hwara did not qualify for a…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.