Pirmuhammad v. Gonzales, 122 F. App'x 132 (5th Cir. 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
Pirmuhammad v. Gonzales, 122 F. App'x 132 (5th Cir. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Ramirez Rojas v. Garland (ca5, 2022-06-08)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ramirez Rojas v. Garland
5th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Pirmuhammad v. Ashcroft, 122 F. App’x 132, 133 (5th Cir. 2005) (holding that multiple death threats, without physical abuse, police detention, or interrogation, are not persecution); Chamorro v. Ashcroft, 119 F. App’x 608, 609 (5th Cir. 2004) (same); Zapeta v. Ashcroft, 103 F. App’x 857, 858 (5th Cir. 2004) (same); Torres v. Ashcroft, 88 F. App’x 706, 707 (5th Cir. 2004) (same).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Daniel Fuentes-Barrera v. William Barr, U. S. Atty
5th Cir. · 2020 · confidence medium
See Eduard, 379 F.3d at 187 & n.4; Ramirez-Mejia, 794 F.3d at 493 ; Tesfamichael v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 109, 116 (5th Cir. 2006); Pirmuhammad v. Ashcroft, 122 F. App’x 132, 132 (5th Cir. 2005) (unpublished) (holding that death threats, without more, are not persecution); Chamorro v. Ashcroft, 119 F. App’x 608, 608 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); Zapeta v. Ashcroft, 103 F. App’x 857, 857 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); Torres v. Ashcroft, 88 F. App’x 706, 706 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); see also Wang, 569 F.3d at 536–37.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dora Trochez Castellanos v. William Barr, U. S. At
5th Cir. · 2020 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Pirmuhammad v. Ashcroft, 122 F. App’x 132, 132 (5th Cir. 2005) (unpublished) (holding that several death threats, without physical abuse, detainment, or interrogation, are not persecution); Chamorro v. Ashcroft, 119 F. App’x 608, 608 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); Zapeta v. Ashcroft, 103 F. App’x 857, 857 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); Torres v. Ashcroft, 88 F. App’x 706, 706 (5th Cir. 2004) (unpublished) (same); accord Reyes-Guerrero v. I.N.S., 192 F.3d 1241, 1243 (9th Cir. 1999) (finding past persecution where repeated and menacing death threats were accompan…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Barkat PIRMUHAMMAD, Petitioner,
v.
John ASHCROFT, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent
04-60142.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Feb 16, 2005.
122 F. App'x 132
Frank Guerra, Sugar Land, TX, for Petitioner., Thomas Ward Hussey, Director, Anthony Cardozo Payne, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. Department of Justice, Barry Joseph Pettinato, U.S. Department of Justice Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, Hipólito Acosta, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Houston, TX, Caryl G. Thompson, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service District Directors Office, New Orleans, LA, for Respondent.
Davis, Smith, Dennis.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Unpublished
PER CURIAM: *

Barkat Pirmuhammad petitions this court to review the decision of the[*133] Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying relief on his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). As to his asylum application, Pirmuhammad seeks to challenge the BIA’s determination that his application was untimely under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2). This court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Pirmuhammad’s asylum application was untimely. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3).

Pirmuhammad argues that the BIA erred in denying his application for withholding of removal. He contends that the several death threats he received while living in the Sindh province of Pakistan constitute past persecution. “[Pjersecution requires more than a few isolated incidents of verbal harassment or intimidation, unaccompanied by any physical punishment, infliction of harm, or significant deprivation of liberty.” Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 187 n. 4 (5th Cir. 2004) (quotation omitted). According to his testimony, Pirmuhammad was never physically abused, detained, or interrogated by police. He has failed to show that he was subject to past persecution. See id.; Abdel-Masieh v. INS, 73 F.3d 579, 583-84 (5th Cir.1996).

Because Pirmuhammad failed to establish past persecution, he must show that it is more likely than not that he will suffer persecution in the future. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(2). Relying on documentary evidence, he argues that members of the MQM party face continuing danger in Pakistan.

Pirmuhammad testified that he was able to avoid threats and persecution from 1994 to 1998 by moving to small villages in the Sindh province. The documentary evidence shows that MQM party members such as Pirmuhammad can safely relocate to other provinces. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Pirmuhammad has not met his burden to establish an entitlement to withholding of removal. See Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir.2002); 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(2), (3)(i).

Pirmuhammad does not brief the BIA’s denial of relief under the CAT. Accordingly, he has waived the claim. See Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n. 15 (5th Cir.1993).

Pirmuhammad’s petition for review is DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be[*133] published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.