Fen Chen v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 14-1321 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1321 FEN MIN CHEN, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted: November 20, 2014 Decided: December 9, 2014 Before KEENAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas V. Massucci, LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS V. MASSUCCI, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Joyce R. Branda, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Erica B. Miles, Senior Litigation Counsel, David Schor, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Fen Min Chen, 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 his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s decision denying his requests for asylum and withholding of removal. * We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the relevant exhibits and the transcript of Chen’s merits hearing. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to that of the agency, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the agency’s decision. 481 (1992). See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. 877 (B.I.A. Mar. 21, 2014). See In re: Chen, No. A087 908 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 * Chen does not dispute the agency’s denial of his request for protection under the Convention Against Torture. 2

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.