Opinion

Zhi Liu v. Eric Holder, Jr.

  • 583 F. App'x 198
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Sep 16, 2014
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Motz, Agee, Davis
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 33.1%

The opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1019

ZHI QIANG LIU,

Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals.

Submitted: September 11, 2014 Decided: September 16, 2014

Before MOTZ and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Brown, LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL BROWN, New York, New York,

for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General,

Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, John D. Williams, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Zhi Qiang Liu, 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 from the

immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum and

withholding of deportation. * We have thoroughly reviewed the

record, including the transcript of Liu’s merits hearing and all

supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does

not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative

factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that

substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. 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: Zhi Qiang Liu (B.I.A.

Dec. 16, 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

*

To the extent that Liu seeks to challenge the immigration

judge’s denial of his request for protection under the

Convention Against Torture, we lack jurisdiction on the ground

that Liu failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before

the Board. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) (2012); Massis v. Mukasey,

549 F.3d 631, 638–40 (4th Cir. 2008).

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.