The Board of Immigration Appeals, in a precedent decision, has held that an Immigration Judge may pretermit — that is, deny without a hearing — an asylum or withholding of removal application that fails to establish a prima facie case for relief, even absent a motion from DHS. The Board reasoned that because applicants bear the burden of establishing eligibility under INA § 240(c)(4), a hearing is unnecessary where it is apparent at the outset that the evidence submitted does not meet the statutory standard, and that Immigration Judges retain broad discretion over how to manage their proceedings.
Applying that standard here, the Board found the respondent had neither alleged past persecution nor presented evidence of a future risk of persecution on account of a protected ground and affirmed the pretermission of the application without a hearing.
The full text of Matter of G-R-B- can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1463256/dl?inline