Dania Manzano v. Merrick Garland
Dania Manzano v. Merrick Garland
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 21-1333 Doc: 26 Filed: 06/17/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-1333
DANIA LETICIA MANZANO; J.Y.M.M., Petitioners, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: May 18, 2022 Decided: June 17, 2022
Before MOTZ, RICHARDSON and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Ivan Yacub, Lauren R. Truslow, YACUB LAW OFFICES, Woodbridge, Virginia, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Nancy Friedman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Margaret A. O’Donnell, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-1333 Doc: 26 Filed: 06/17/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM: Dania Leticia Manzano and her minor child, natives and citizens of Honduras, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing their appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision denying Manzano’s request for asylum and withholding of removal. We have thoroughly reviewed the record 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 INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re Manzano (B.I.A. Mar. 3, 2021).
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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.