# Zhi Liu v. Eric Holder, Jr.

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 16, 2014 · 583 F. App'x 198

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2733283

## Case

- **Full name:** ZHI QIANG LIU, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 16, 2014
- **Citations:** 583 F. App'x 198
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Motz, Agee, Davis
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2733283

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED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Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2733283. Public record. Not legal advice.