Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Josephine Ngumbi v. Loretta Lynch, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views3 pages
    1) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Josephine Mbete Ngumbi's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision dismissing her appeal of the immigration judge's denial of her application for asylum. 2) The court reviewed the documentary record, testimony, and evidence and concluded that substantial evidence supported the finding that Ngumbi failed to establish a nexus between her past harm or fear of future harm and a protected ground. 3) The record did not compel a different result, so the court denied Ngumbi's petition for review.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-06-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-1855

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Josephine Mbete Ngumbi's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision dismissing her appeal of the immigration judge's denial of her application for asylum. 2) The court reviewed the documentary record, testimony, and evidence and concluded that substantial evidence supported the finding that Ngumbi failed to establish a nexus between her past harm or fear of future harm and a protected ground. 3) The record did not compel a different result, so the court denied Ngumbi's petition for review.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    10 views3 pages

    Josephine Ngumbi v. Loretta Lynch, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Josephine Mbete Ngumbi's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision dismissing her appeal of the immigration judge's denial of her application for asylum. 2) The court reviewed the documentary record, testimony, and evidence and concluded that substantial evidence supported the finding that Ngumbi failed to establish a nexus between her past harm or fear of future harm and a protected ground. 3) The record did not compel a different result, so the court denied Ngumbi's petition for review.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-1855

    JOSEPHINE MBETE NGUMBI,


    Petitioner,
    v.
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.

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


    Appeals.

    Submitted:

    June 8, 2015

    Decided:

    June 12, 2015

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Arlington,


    Virginia, for Petitioner.
    Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy
    Assistant Attorney General, Ernesto H. Molina, Jr., Assistant
    Director, Tracey N. McDonald, 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:
    Josephine

    Mbete

    Ngumbi,

    native

    and

    citizen

    of

    Kenya,

    petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration


    Appeals

    (Board)

    dismissing

    her

    appeal

    from

    the

    judges order denying her application for asylum. *

    immigration
    We deny the

    petition for review.


    We

    review

    factual

    findings

    for

    substantial

    evidence.

    Hernandez-Avalos v. Lynch, 784 F.3d 944, 948 (4th Cir. 2015).


    Such findings are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator
    would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.

    Id. (internal

    quotation marks omitted).

    We will uphold the Boards decision

    unless

    contrary

    it

    is

    discretion.
    reviewed

    to

    law

    and

    an

    Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).

    the

    documentary

    manifestly

    record,

    evidence,

    including
    and

    Ngumbis

    conclude

    that

    testimony
    substantial

    abuse

    of

    We have
    and

    the

    evidence

    supports the finding that Ngumbi failed to establish a nexus


    between her past harm or her fear of future harm on account of a
    protected ground.

    Accordingly, the record does not compel a

    different result.

    The immigration judge also denied Ngumbis applications


    for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention
    Against Torture. Ngumbi has abandoned review of those decisions
    by failing to challenge those decisions in her brief. Karimi v.
    Holder, 715 F.3d 561, 565 n.2 (4th Cir. 2013).

    We deny the petition for review.

    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

    You might also like