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)
23-1522•Guylain Cibaka Tshizubu v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
23-1522Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 5, 2024
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1522
GUYLAIN CIBAKA TSHIZUBU,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: February 1, 2024 Decided: April 5, 2024
Before THACKER and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Ronald D. Richey, LAW OFFICE OF RONALD D. RICHEY, Rockville,
Maryland, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General,
Nancy Friedman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Gregory A. Pennington, Jr., Trial Attorney,
Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Guylain Cibaka Tshizubu, a native and citizen of the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing
his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding
of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the
record and Tshizubu’s claims and conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling
contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and
that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief, see Herrera-Alcala v. Garland, 39
F.4th 233, 245 (4th Cir. 2022) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we deny the
petition for review. In re Tshizubu (B.I.A. Apr. 14, 2023). 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.