Case: 15-10131 Date Filed: 06/25/2019 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 15-10131 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A205-361-369 OLGA GENNADYEVNA GILYAZETDINOVA, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (June 25, 2019) Before MARCUS, JORDAN and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Olga Gilyazetdinova, a native of the Soviet Union and a citizen of Russia, appeals the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (“BIA”) final order dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for asylum, Case: 15-10131 Date Filed: 06/25/2019 Page: 2 of 8 withholding of removal, and relief under Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). She only appeals the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal, abandoning any challenge to the denial of asylum and CAT relief. On appeal, she says that substantial evidence does not support the IJ’s adverse credibility determination or the agency’s denial of withholding of removal because she showed a nexus between her persecution and Bashkir ethnicity, and because the country condition reports reveal that societal violence and discrimination was increasing in Russia, especially in the place of suggested relocation, Bashkortostan. After careful review, we deny the petition. Where the BIA either agreed with the IJ’s findings or relied on the IJ’s reasoning, we review both the BIA and IJ decisions to the extent of the agreement. Mu Ying Wu v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 745 F.3d 1140, 1153 (11th Cir. 2014). We review the IJ’s findings of fact under the substantial evidence test, and will affirm the IJ’s decision if it is supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole. Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1230 (11th Cir. 2005). Under the substantial evidence test, we review the record evidence in the light most favorable to the agency’s decision and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of it. Ruiz v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 440 F.3d 1247, 1255 (11th Cir. 2006). Thus, a finding of fact will only be reversed when the record compels it. Id. The mere fact that the record may support a different conclusion is insufficient to 2 Case: 15-10131 Date Filed: 06/25/2019 Page: 3 of 8 justify a reversal of the agency’s findings. Id. We do not consider issues not reached by the BIA. Gonzalez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 820 F.3d 399, 403 (11th Cir. 2016). To qualify for withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), an alien must show that her life or freedom would be threatened, in the country to which she would be removed, on account of her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3). The burden is on the alien to show eligibility for relief. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b); Sepulveda, 401 F.3d at 1232. A petitioner may satisfy her burden in one of two ways. 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b). First, she may ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals