Jing He 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). He’s request for oral
argument is denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JING HE,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 12-70364
Agency No. A095-747-811
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 24, 2013**
Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Jing He, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of
Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s
decision denying her application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual
FILED
SEP 30 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-70364 2
findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we
deny the petition for review.
Even if He testified credibly, substantial evidence supports the agency’s
finding that He failed to establish past persecution, see Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d
1014, 1020-21 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner did not suffer past persecution when he
was detained for 15 days and beaten on one occasion, did not need medical
attention, and did not suffer adverse employment consequences), and the agency’s
finding that He does not have an objective, well-founded fear of future persecution,
see Ladha v. INS, 215 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2000) (in the absence of a
presumption of a well-founded future fear, the petitioner needs credible, direct, and
specific evidence that would support a reasonable fear of persecution).
Accordingly, He’s asylum claim fails.
Because He failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum, it follows
that she has not met the higher standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye
v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --