Case: 19-13099 Date Filed: 06/12/2020 Page: 1 of 9 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-13099 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A216-586-042 IQBAL HASAN-CHOWDHURY, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (June 12, 2020) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LAGOA, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 19-13099 Date Filed: 06/12/2020 Page: 2 of 9 Iqbal Hasan-Chowdhury seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Before this court, he argues only that substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s affirmance of the IJ’s determination that he failed to establish that, if he were removed to Bangladesh, the Bangladeshi government would be unable or unwilling to protect him, as required for asylum. For the reasons that follow, we deny Hasan-Chowdhury’s petition. We review only the decision of the BIA, except to the extent that the BIA expressly adopts the IJ’s decision. Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262, 1284 (11th Cir. 2001). Where instead the BIA agrees with the IJ’s reasoning, we also review the IJ’s decision, but only to the extent of the agreement. Ayala v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 605 F.3d 941, 947–48 (11th Cir. 2010). The BIA is not required to discuss every piece of evidence presented in its order, but it is required to consider all the evidence submitted by the applicant. See Tan v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 446 F.3d 1369, 1376 (11th Cir. 2006). The BIA’s legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1283. We review factual determinations under the substantial evidence test. Ruiz v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 440 F.3d 1247, 1254-55 (11th Cir. 2006). We must affirm the 2 Case: 19-13099 Date Filed: 06/12/2020 Page: 3 of 9 decision “if it is supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Id. (quotation omitted). We will view “the record evidence in the light most favorable to the agency’s decision and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of that decision.” Id. at 1255 (quotation omitted). We will reverse a finding of fact by the BIA “only when the record compels a reversal; the mere fact that the record may support a contrary conclusion is not enough to justify a reversal of the administrative findings.” Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022, 1027 (11th Cir. 2004) (en banc). In addition, claims that are not briefed on appeal are deemed abandoned, and we will not address their merits. Cole v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 712 F.3d 517, 530 (11th Cir. 2013). For an argument to be sufficiently briefed on appeal, the argument must include the petitioner’s “contentions and the reasons for them, with citations to the authorities and parts of the record on which the appellant relies.” Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A). Thus, a ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals