
    Thuya MAUNG, Petitioner, v. Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 07-1586.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 11, 2008.
    Decided: April 25, 2008.
    
      Sandy Rhine, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General, M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright, Assistant Director, Jonathan Robbins, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before TRAXLER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM:

Thuya Maung, a native and citizen of Burma, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his applications for relief from removal.

Maung first challenges the determination that he failed to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Maung fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Maung cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED. of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to reopen immigration proceedings.  