MD Anwar Hossain v. Matthew G. Whitaker


NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 19a0040n.06 No. 18-3511 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT MD ANWAR HOSSAIN, ) FILED ) Jan 24, 2019 Petitioner, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) v. ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION General, ) APPEALS ) Respondent. ) ) Before: CLAY, COOK, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. LARSEN, Circuit Judge. After the Department of Homeland Security began removal proceedings against him, MD Anwar Hossain sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. An immigration judge (IJ) found Hossain not credible, denied relief, and ordered Hossain removed from the country. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed. Because substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, we DENY Hossain’s petition for review. I. At a hearing before the IJ, Hossain testified that he was born in Burma (now Myanmar) but was relocated to Bangladesh when he was around one year old. He further testified that he was adopted as an infant but that his adoptive parents became abusive toward him once they had children of their own. According to Hossain, his adoptive parents, with the assistance of a broker, No. 18-3511, Hossain v. Whitaker obtained a Bangladeshi passport for him, and he then entered the United States on a non-immigrant visa in October 2013, at the age of 22, under the guise of attending a robotics competition with his university. Hossain remained in the United States. A few weeks later, the Department of Homeland Security issued Hossain a Notice to Appear, alleging that he had obtained his visa through fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact and was therefore removable pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(A). Before the Immigration Court, Hossain conceded removability but sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. He testified that he feared returning to Bangladesh because he believed his adoptive parents would harm him or report him to the police in an effort to have him sent back to Myanmar. Hossain also testified that he feared being mistreated if he were to return to Myanmar due to his Muslim faith. The IJ denied Hossain’s application for relief and ordered him removed to Bangladesh. The IJ determined that Hossain lacked credibility, citing “the significant discrepancies within [Hossain’s] testimony and between his testimony and asylum application,” and the implausibility of some of Hossain’s testimony. The IJ concluded that Hossain had not met his burden of establishing relief from removability. In the alternative, the IJ determined that, even if Hossain’s testimony had been credible, the facts alleged still would not entitle him to asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture because Hossain failed to meet his burden to demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. Hossain appealed to the BIA, but the BIA dismissed Hossain’s appeal, concluding that the IJ had not erred by refusing to credit Hossain’s testimony. -2- No. ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals