NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 26 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VINESH KUMAR SINGH, No. 15-72503 Petitioner, Agency No. A096-674-693 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted September 11, 2017 San Francisco, California Before: KOZINSKI and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT, ** District Judge. Vinesh Singh argues that the state-created danger doctrine prohibits the federal government from deporting him to Fiji, where it would be harder for him to obtain treatment for a medical condition he contracted while serving a sentence in * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation. a California prison. See L.W. v. Grubbs, 974 F.2d 119, 121-22 (9th Cir. 1992). We assume for the purposes of this appeal that a deportation could be enjoined based on the state-created danger doctrine. See Morgan v. Gonzales, 495 F.3d 1084, 1093 (9th Cir. 2007). And we assume that Singh might be entitled to factfinding in a district court if he alleged a colorable claim under that state-created danger doctrine. See id. at 1090. We deny the petition, however, because Singh lacks a colorable claim on the merits.1 Because federal officials were not involved in creating the danger Singh allegedly faces, the law does not require federal officials to protect him from it. Compare, e.g., Wang v. Reno, 81 F.3d 808, 818 (9th Cir. 1996). PETITION DENIED. 1 Singh’s request for judicial notice of court documents in another lawsuit is granted. See Fed. R. Evid. 201. 2 15-72503 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Vinesh Singh v. Jefferson Sessions 26 September 2017 Agency Unpublished 821b8aeb6e5ac9319bbaf2114183911db7c061f7
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals