HYUN JUN PARK v. HOLDER, 13-1409. (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20131204110
Visitors: 10
Filed: Dec. 04, 2013
Latest Update: Dec. 04, 2013
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Hyun Jun Park, a native and citizen of South Korea, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's (IJ) decision denying his requests for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Park's merits hearing and his supporting evi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Hyun Jun Park, a native and citizen of South Korea, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's (IJ) decision denying his requests for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Park's merits hearing and his supporting evid..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Hyun Jun Park, a native and citizen of South Korea, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge's (IJ) decision denying his requests for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Park's merits hearing and his 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 to uphold the IJ's denial of Park's applications for 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. See In re: Hyun Jun Park (B.I.A. Mar. 1, 2013). 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.
Source: Leagle
