Case: 19-60607 Document: 00515616357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/26/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 26, 2020 No. 19-60607 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Reynaldo Asiel Selles Illas, Petitioner, versus William P. Barr, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A215 734 242 Before Haynes, Willett, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Reynaldo Asiel Selles Illas, a native and citizen of Cuba, petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing an appeal from an order of the immigration judge denying his * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-60607 Document: 00515616357 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/26/2020 No. 19-60607 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review the factual determination that an alien is not eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief under the substantial evidence standard. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Under this standard, “reversal is improper” unless we decide “not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). In this case, Selles Illas has not met this standard. As to asylum and past persecution, the BIA found that Selles Illas failed to establish that any harm he suffered in Cuba rose to the level of persecution. We hold that the evidence does not compel a contrary conclusion. See Majd v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 590, 595 (5th Cir. 2006); Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 187-88 (5th Cir. 2004). As to asylum and any well-founded fear of future persecution, the BIA found that Selles Illas failed to demonstrate that there existed a reasonable probability that he would suffer harm rising to the level of persecution were he to return to Cuba. Selles Illas has failed to adequately brief any challenge to the BIA’s finding in this regard; accordingly he has abandoned the issue. See United States v. Scroggins¸599 F.3d 433, 446-47 (5th Cir. 2010); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). In light of the foregoing, Selles Illas has not shown error in connection with his asylum claim. See Chen, 470 F.3d at 1134. As to withholding of removal, Selles Illas has failed to adequately brief any challenge to the BIA’s finding that he is not entitled to relief on his application for withholding of removal, and, accordingly, he has abandoned any such challenge. See Soadjede, 324 F.3d at 833. Additionally, his CAT claim fails because he does not show that the evidence compels the 2 Case: 19-60607 Document: 00515616357 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/26/2020 No. 19-60607 conclusion, contrary to the BIA’s findings, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals