NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BADIH RAZZOUK, No. 19-71852 Petitioner, Agency No. A216-626-703 v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney MEMORANDUM* General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 15, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and R. NELSON and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges. Badih Razzouk, a native and citizen of Syria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of his application for asylum and * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition. The BIA properly rejected Razzouk’s claim of well-founded fear of persecution on account of his religion because substantial evidence supports that there was no pattern or practice of persecution by Islamic terrorist organizations against Christians.1 The record does not compel the conclusion that the violence by Islamic extremists against Christians was “sufficiently widespread” or “systematic” in Syria. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1061 (9th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). According to the U.S. Department of State (“State Department”), ISIS’s atrocities were endured by Christians residing “in areas it control[led].” In 2017, ISIS control was limited to northeastern Syria, near Iraq, in three out of Syria’s fourteen governorates. Areas of Syria—such as Mashta El Helo in Tartus—were predominately Christian and under the control of the Syrian government in 2017 and 2018. According to the State Department, “leaders from a number of minority religious groups, such as representatives of the Catholic and Orthodox Christian 1 Razzouk also argues that he has well-founded fear of persecution because Christians are a “disfavored group.” We note that “disfavored group analysis is an evidentiary concept that applies when a petitioner attempts to show that []he will be individually singled out for persecution.” Tampubolon v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1056, 1062 (9th Cir. 2010); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(2)(iii)(A). Because Razzouk failed to argue that he faces an individualized risk of persecution before the BIA, we lack jurisdiction to review his eligibility for relief under the disfavored group analysis. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1). 2 communities” view the Syrian government as “their protector against violent Sunni extremists.” Evidence also shows that the violence against Christians is not sufficiently systematic; rather, the State Department has described most of the violence in Syria as “indiscriminate,” affecting large portions of the population, not just Christians.2 See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1061. The BIA also properly concluded that Razzouk failed to establish a well- founded fear of persecution based on his membership in the proposed particular social group of “young Syrian males who would be subject to military recruitment and who take physical action to avoid military service.” “[F]orced …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals