NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 19-2331 ASHOK GURUNG Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Respondent ______________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (No.: A206-023-467) Immigration Judge: R.K. Malloy Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on February 4, 2020 Before: SHWARTZ, SCIRICA and RENDELL, Circuit Judges _________ O P I N I O N* _________ RENDELL, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Ashok Gurung, a native and citizen of Nepal, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). For the following reasons, we will deny the petition for review. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Gurung entered the United States unlawfully in 2013 and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) commenced removal proceedings against him under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). Gurung conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under CAT. In support of his applications, Gurung claimed a fear of returning to Nepal because he is at risk of being harmed by Nepali Maoists. At his removal hearing before the Immigration Judge (IJ), Gurung testified in support of his applications for relief as follows: Gurung worked as a volunteer for the Nepali Congress Party, which included campaigning and distributing informational pamphlets. As a result, he became the target of a rival political party, the Maoists. Maoist members sent him threatening letters, which demanded that he join the Maoists or * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 suffer harm. On one occasion, Maoist members violently attacked him in his home. To avoid such threats and violence, Gurung fled to Pokhara, Nepal to stay with family, returning to his home village after six months. He left again for Pokhara after two or three months because Maoists returned to his home and threatened his parents. Gurung ultimately fled Nepal after a few more months in Pokhara, when he saw Maoists and once again felt unsafe. He arrived in the United States in 2013. To support his applications, Gurung submitted, among other things, an affidavit recounting the Maoist attack, threatening letters allegedly sent from the Maoist party, and medical records related to the attack. The IJ also heard testimony from an expert, Dr. Paran Niraula, who has a background in policy, education management, and leadership. Dr. Niraula testified that the political situation in Nepal is unstable and that Maoists in the country have targeted low-level grassroots party workers. II. DECISIONS FROM THE IJ AND BIA The IJ issued a decision and order denying Gurung’s applications, providing several reasons for the denial. First, the IJ concluded that Gurung’s testimony was not credible. The IJ based this adverse credibility determination on several discrepancies between Gurung’s testimony and other evidence, including his affidavit and medical records. The IJ also gave the supporting documents and expert testimony little to ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals