HOSSAIN v. SESSIONS III (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Shakhawat Hossain, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusions that the threats and harassment Hossain suffered in Bangladesh did not rise to the level of persecution, see Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1153-54 (9th Cir. 2005) (threats did not compel finding of past persecution), and that Hossain failed to establish it is more likely than not that he would be persecuted on account of his political opinion, see Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”). Thus, Hossain’s withholding of removal claim fails.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Hossain’s CAT claim because he failed to establish that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the government in Bangladesh. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject Hossain’s contentions that the BIA ignored evidence, or violated his due process rights. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (error required to prevail on due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.