Tang vs. Ashcroft, (5th Cir. 2003)
Linked as:
Text
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 9, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 03-60105 Summary Calendar KWOK HUNG TANG, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (A76 391 999) Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * KOOK Hung Tang petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reopen. He contends that the evidence attached to the motion demonstrates: circumstances in Hong Kong have changed since his removal order was issued; and he will be persecuted by the government if he returns to Hong Kong.
Tang has failed to produce material evi dence that would establish his prima facie case for asylum or withholding of removal ba sed upon changed conditions in Hong Kong. S ee INS v. Diehard , 502 U.S. 314, 322-23 (1992). Therefore, he has not established that the BIA abused its discretion in denying his motion to reopen.
See Eye v. Ashcroft , 293 F.3d 899, 904 (5th Cir. 2002); Bahraini v. United States Immigration an d Naturalization Service , 782 F.2d 1243, 1244 (5th Cir.), cert. denied ,
Sponsored links
This document cites
- U.S. Supreme Court - INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314 (1992)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Kenneth Efe, Petitioner, v. John D. Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States, Respondent., 293 F.3d 899 (5th Cir. 2002)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Hamid Bahramnia, Petitioner, v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent. No. 85-4446. Summary Calendar., 782 F.2d 1243 (5th Cir. 1986)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
