NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 21a0008n.06 Case No. 20-3635 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Jan 06, 2021 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ROSE DIKEH, aka Rose Gloria Oluku, ) ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW Petitioner, ) FROM THE UNITED STATES ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION v. ) APPEALS ) JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting Attorney General, ) OPINION ) Respondent. ) BEFORE: COLE, Chief Judge; SILER and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges. COLE, Chief Judge. Petitioner Rose Dikeh appeals the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her petition for asylum, statutory withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Dikeh argues the BIA erred because it failed to consider her fear of future persecution based on violence committed against Christians in Nigeria. As explained below, we lack jurisdiction to consider Dikeh’s asylum claim because she failed to submit her application for asylum on a timely basis. We are also foreclosed from reviewing her claims for withholding of removal and protection under the CAT, as she failed to exhaust administrative remedies with the BIA. Accordingly, we dismiss Dikeh’s petition. Case No. 20-3635, Dikeh v. Rosen I. BACKGROUND Dikeh, a native and citizen of Nigeria, was admitted to the United States in June 2003 with a nonimmigrant student visa. In 2006, her status was terminated once she was no longer a student. Thirteen years later, in 2019, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) served Dikeh with a notice to appear before an IJ, charging her with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(C)(i) for failing to maintain nonimmigrant status. During her initial appearance before the IJ, Dikeh indicated she desired to apply for asylum. Proceeding pro se, Dikeh applied for asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158, statutory withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3), and protection under the regulations implementing the CAT, 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.16(c), 1208.18. She stated in her application that she feared returning to Nigeria because it is home to her abusive ex-husband and an anti-Christian terrorist organization, Boko Haram. At her merits hearing before the IJ, Dikeh testified she had left Nigeria to pursue a college degree. She also explained that her ex-husband was sexually, physically, and emotionally abusive, and she accordingly feared returning. When asked by the IJ whether she had any other reason to fear returning to Nigeria, she identified Boko Haram but insisted that her “major reason” was her ex-husband. (Administrative Record (“A.R.”) at 104.) DHS submitted two U.S. Department of State reports on human rights practices and religious freedom in Nigeria for consideration by the IJ. The IJ denied Dikeh’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT and ordered her removed to Nigeria. The IJ first noted that her application for asylum was untimely because Dikeh filed it 16 years after arriving to the United States and had not identified any changes in her country of nationality or circumstances that would have affected -2- Case No. 20-3635, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals