Narrative Opinion Summary
Substantial evidence supports the Immigration Judge’s conclusion that Al-Najjar did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on a protected ground. Relevant case law, including INS v. Elias-Zacarias and others, underlines the requirement for a clear probability of future persecution for withholding of deportation. Al-Najjar's failure to meet this heightened burden led to the denial of his petition for review. This decision is not intended for publication and is not to be cited in courts of the circuit, except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Evidence Requirement for Asylum Claimssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Immigration Judge found that Al-Najjar did not provide substantial evidence to demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution.
Reasoning: Substantial evidence supports the Immigration Judge’s conclusion that Al-Najjar did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on a protected ground.
Non-Publication and Citation of Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The decision in this case is not intended for publication and has restrictions on being cited in court, per Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Reasoning: This decision is not intended for publication and is not to be cited in courts of the circuit, except as allowed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Standard for Withholding of Deportationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case demonstrates that a petitioner must show a clear probability of future persecution to qualify for withholding of deportation.
Reasoning: Relevant case law, including INS v. Elias-Zacarias and others, underlines the requirement for a clear probability of future persecution for withholding of deportation.