The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
22-1321•Katia Carolina Vargas Anariba; K.a.m.v. v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
22-1321Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 31, 2023
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-1321
KATIA CAROLINA VARGAS ANARIBA; K.A.M.V.,
Petitioners,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: November 29, 2022 Decided: August 31, 2023
Before GREGORY and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton,
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Corey L. Farrell, Acting Senior Litigation
Counsel, Jaclyn G. Hagner, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Katia Carolina Vargas Anariba and her minor daughter, natives and citizens of
Honduras, petition for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(“Board”) denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture. After thoroughly reviewing the record, we
conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to the administrative factual
findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the denial of
relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the
petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.