Qiangqiang Chen v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
QIANGQIANG CHEN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71551
Agency No. A099-961-932
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 21, 2012**
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Qiangqiang Chen, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s
(“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal.
FILED
MAR 02 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-71551 2
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence,
Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018-19 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Chen’s experiences in
China, including the mistreatment he suffered during his detention and the
imposition of a daily reporting requirement did not rise to the level of persecution.
See id. at 1020-21. The record supports the IJ’s denial of Chen’s asylum claim,
because Chen failed to establish an objectively reasonable fear of future
persecution in light of the fact that his similarly situated father lives in China
unharmed. See Aruta v. INS, 80 F.3d 1389, 1395 (9th Cir. 1996).
Because Chen did not establish eligibility for asylum, it necessarily follows
that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --