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

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: April 29, 2002
Case: Ferseta 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 ** Vasile and Maria Ferseta, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Romania, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their application for asylum and withholding of deportation. The Fersetas conceded de-portability for staying in the United States longer than permitted but allege fear of mistreatment at the hands of the Romanian government because of their anti-Communist political opinion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to INA § 242(b); 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252 (b), and we deny the Fersetas’ petition for review. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we do not recount it here except as necessary to explain our decision. The BIA’s decision that an alien has not established eligibility for asylum is reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. See Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 861-62 (9th Cir.2001). The standard is extremely deferential, requiring a reviewing court to uphold the Board’s denial unless an alien demonstrates “that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to fin…

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