Shiwu Dong v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 08-1679 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1679 SHIWU DONG, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: March 25, 2009 Decided: April 7, 2009 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas V. Massucci, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Gregory G. Katsas, Assistant Attorney General, Susan K. Houser, Senior Litigation Counsel, Justin R. Markel, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Shiwu Dong, a native and citizen of the People s Republic of China, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration immigration withholding Appeals judge s of dismissing denial removal, of and his his appeal requests protection under from for the the asylum, Convention Against Torture. Before this court, Dong challenges the determination that he failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility To for relief, an alien must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution. U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Dong fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief that he seeks. Additionally, we uphold the denial of Dong s request for withholding of removal. Because the burden of proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3). 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). 2 Camara v. Ashcroft, Because Dong failed to show that he is eligible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal. We also find that substantial evidence supports the finding that Dong failed to meet the standard for relief under the Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, an applicant must establish that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2008). We find that Dong failed to make the requisite showing before the immigration court. Accordingly, dispense with oral we deny argument the petition because the for facts review. and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
