NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 16 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FANGJUN WU, No. 13-72383 Petitioner, Agency No. A099-062-698 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 11, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Fangjun Wu, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Wu failed to demonstrate the harm he experienced in China rose to the level of persecution. See He v. Holder, 749 F.3d 792, 796 (9th Cir. 2014) (petitioner must show “substantial evidence of further persecution” apart from spouse’s forced abortion). Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Wu did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution in China. See Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1022 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner did not “present compelling, objective evidence demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution”). Thus, his asylum claim fails. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 13-72383 13-72383 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Fangjun Wu v. Jefferson Sessions 16 April 2018 Agency Unpublished ffe1d3e4072747b6bb9cc799e397a45ccc4e0817
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals