FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BALDEV SINGH MANHANI, No. 17-72231 Petitioner, Agency No. v. A097-545-859 WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, OPINION Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 22, 2019* Seattle, Washington Filed November 25, 2019 Before: Richard R. Clifton and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges, and Jed S. Rakoff,** District Judge. Opinion by Judge Clifton * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). ** The Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. 2 MANHANI V. BARR SUMMARY*** Immigration The panel denied Baldev Singh Manhani’s petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying a waiver of deportation under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H), based on the frivolous asylum application bar at 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(6), holding that the bar precludes an applicant from receiving all benefits under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Section 1158(d)(6) states that if the Attorney General determines that an alien has knowingly made a frivolous application for asylum and the alien has received the notice under paragraph (4)(A), the alien shall be permanently ineligible for any benefits under this chapter. Manhani argued that the Immigration Judge’s uncontested finding that he filed a frivolous asylum application did not bar him from receiving a waiver under § 1158(d)(6) because the bar applied to asylum benefits only. The panel disagreed. In light of the plain language of the Act, this circuit’s precedent, and that of other circuits, the panel concluded that the phrase “under this chapter” refers to Chapter 12 of Title 8 of the U.S. Code (the INA), the chapter in which the section is found. The panel rejected Manhani’s contention that the phrase applied to only the subchapter or section containing the frivolous asylum bar. The panel therefore held that, as a result of the frivolous asylum application finding, Manhani is *** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. MANHANI V. BARR 3 barred from receiving all benefits under the INA, including a waiver of deportation. COUNSEL Cornell Kirby, Seattle, Washington, for Petitioner. Laura Halliday Hickein, Trial Attorney; Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director; Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; for Respondent. OPINION CLIFTON, Circuit Judge: Baldev Singh Manhani petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying him a waiver of deportation under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) § 237(a)(1)(H), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H). Manhani argues that the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) uncontested finding that he filed a frivolous asylum application does not bar him from receiving such a waiver under INA § 208(d)(6), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(6). We disagree. Section 1158(d)(6) states: If the Attorney General determines that an alien has knowingly made a frivolous ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals