Mohamed Jameleddine Jemail 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 finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JT/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MOHAMED JAMELEDDINE JEMAIL,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-70093
Agency No. A078-466-100
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Mohamed Jameleddine Jemail, a native and citizen of Tunisia, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding
FILED
DEC 16 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JT/Research 07-70093 2
of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
substantial evidence, Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 338-39 (9th Cir. 1995), and we
deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that changed circumstances
excused the untimely filing of Jemail’s asylum application. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.4(a)(4); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 656-58 (9th Cir. 2007) (per
curiam). Accordingly, we deny the petition with respect to the asylum claim.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Jemail failed
to establish past persecution because the harms he suffered did not rise to the level
of persecution. See Prasad, 47 F.3d at 339-40. Substantial evidence further
supports the agency’s finding that Jemail failed to establish a clear probability of
future persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1185 (9th Cir. 2003)
(denying withholding of removal despite evidence of abuse against ethnic
Albanians, where petitioner failed to establish an appreciably higher risk of
persecution than other Albanians). Accordingly, we deny the petition with respect
to the withholding of removal claim.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --