Yousef v. Mukasey
273 F. App'x 391
5th Cir.
2008
Check Treatment
Docket

Diana L. EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 07-41082

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 11, 2008.

391

Walter Clyde Brocato, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General Transportation Division, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The judgment of the district court, rejecting the Title VII claims of the plaintiff, is affirmed for the reasons given by that court in the careful and thorough order dated October 1, 2007.

AFFIRMED.

Mohammad Ali YOUSEF, also known as Yousef Mohammadali, Petitioner v. Michael B. MUKASEY, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-60331

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 11, 2008.

391

Ellen Sprovach, Gregg M. Rosenberg & Associates, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Pablo Rodriguez, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.

Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Linda Susan Wendtland, Holly Michele Smith, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Shelley R. Goad, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Hipolito Acosta, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, for Respondent.

Before STEWART, OWEN and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Mohammad Ali Yousef, a native and citizen of Kuwait, has filed a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order denying his application for withholding of removal. Yousef argues that his application should be granted because it is more than likely that he will be persecuted upon his return to Kuwait because he is a Palestinian.

Yousef does not address the BIA‘s denial of his application for voluntary departure and the denial of his motion to reconsider, which the BIA deemed as a motion to reopen. Yousef also does not address the BIA‘s determination that his appeal from the Immigration Judge‘s decision after remand, which the BIA construed in part as a motion to reconsider, was time-barred. Accordingly, Yousef has abandoned review of these issues. See

.

Yousef cannot establish that his withholding of removal application should have been granted. This court reviews the BIA‘s rulings of law de novo and its findings of fact, including its findings regarding withholding of removal, for substantial evidence.

. Under the substantial evidence standard, this court may not reverse the BIA‘s factual findings unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.
The record does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA‘s finding that Yousef did not demonstrate past persecution on account of his membership in a particular social group.
; 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1). The record also does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA‘s finding that Yousef did not meet his burden of proof establishing that it was more likely than not that he would be persecuted on account of his membership in a particular social group upon his return to Kuwait.
; 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(2). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.

Notes

*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.