Luis Hernando Perez v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 4th Cir. 1999 . - 2 - PER CURIAM: Luis…

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1677
LUIS HERNANDO PEREZ,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A79-101-761)
Submitted: February 24, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006
Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arturo Hernandez, Vienna, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D.
Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Marleigh D. Dover, Isaac J.
Lidsky, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

*Perez does not challenge the immigration judge’s denial of
withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against
Torture. Therefore, these claims are waived. Edwards v. City of
Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Luis Hernando Perez, a native and citizen of Colombia,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s denial
of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture. * In his petition for review,
Perez challenges the immigration judge’s determination that he
failed to establish his eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal
of a decision denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show
that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable
factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.”
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have
reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Perez fails to
show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Accordingly, we
deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --