USCA11 Case: 20-12108 Date Filed: 08/11/2021 Page: 1 of 5 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-12108 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A208-536-732 JOHIRUL ISLAM, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (August 11, 2021) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 20-12108 Date Filed: 08/11/2021 Page: 2 of 5 Johirul Islam, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of an order affirming the denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act and for relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b), 1231(b)(3). The Board of Immigration Appeals agreed with the findings of the immigration judge that Islam was not credible and, in the alternative, that he failed to establish that he suffered past persecution or had a well-founded fear of future persecution or that he would be tortured if returned to Bangladesh. We deny Islam’s petition. Islam argues that the Board failed to give reasoned consideration to his arguments, but we disagree. The Board “considered the issues raised and announced its decision in terms sufficient to enable [us, as] a reviewing court to perceive that it . . . heard and thought and not merely reacted.” Bing Quan Lin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 881 F.3d 860, 874 (11th Cir. 2018) (quoting Jeune v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 810 F.3d 792, 803 (11th Cir. 2016)). The Board declined to summarily affirm the immigration judge’s decision, as requested by the Department of Homeland Security, and addressed each of Islam’s challenges to the adverse credibility ruling, to the denial of each form of asylum relief, and to the immigration judge’s conduct during the removal proceedings. The Board accurately recounted the record, adequately explained its findings, and gave 2 USCA11 Case: 20-12108 Date Filed: 08/11/2021 Page: 3 of 5 reasonable grounds for its decision. The Board found that the factors relevant to credibility supported the immigration judge’s adverse finding, see 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii); that Islam failed to prove he had been persecuted, had an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution, or would be tortured if he returned to Bangladesh; and that he had not been deprived of a full and fair removal hearing. And the Board was not required to address every piece of evidence Islam presented or case he cited. See Tan v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 446 F.3d 1369, 1374 (11th Cir. 2006). Islam argues that the immigration judge was hostile and biased, but the record shows that Islam received a full and fair hearing. See Lapaix v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 605 F.3d 1138, 1143 (11th Cir. 2010). Islam complains about remarks regarding his ethnicity and native language, but the immigration judge reasonably inquired about Islam’s preferred language and instructed him to answer questions precisely. And the immigration judge …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals