Case: 19-11476 Date Filed: 02/06/2020 Page: 1 of 16 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-11476 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A216-275-064 GANESH BAHADUR-CHHETRI, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (February 6, 2020) Before JORDAN, NEWSOM and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 19-11476 Date Filed: 02/06/2020 Page: 2 of 16 Ganesh Bahadur-Chhetri, a native and citizen of Nepal who entered the United States without inspection in February 2018, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) final order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his September 2018 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) relief. Bahadur-Chhetri asserts the IJ and BIA 1 erred in denying asylum because (1) the record compels a finding that he suffered past persecution; and (2) the IJ and BIA erred by failing to consider the proper standards for a well-founded fear of future persecution, and the record compels a finding that he had a well-founded fear of future persecution. He also contends the IJ and BIA erred in denying withholding of removal and CAT relief. After review, 2 we deny the petition. 1 Because the BIA agreed with the IJ’s reasoning, we review the decisions of both the IJ and the BIA. See Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262, 1284 (11th Cir. 2001) (stating we “review only the [BIA’s] decision, except to the extent that it expressly adopts the IJ’s opinion. Insofar as the [BIA] adopts the IJ’s reasoning, we will review the IJ’s decision as well.” (citation omitted)). 2 Factual determinations are reviewed under the substantial evidence test, which requires us to “view the record evidence in the light most favorable to the agency’s decision and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of that decision.” Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022, 1026-27 (11th Cir. 2004) (en banc). We “must affirm the BIA’s decision if it is supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Id. at 1027 (quotations omitted). To reverse factual findings, we must find that the record not only supports reversal, but compels it. Id. 2 Case: 19-11476 Date Filed: 02/06/2020 Page: 3 of 16 I. DISCUSSION 1. Asylum An applicant for asylum must meet the Immigration and Nationality Act’s definition of a refugee. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1). The definition of “refugee” includes: any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality . . . and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). “To establish asylum eligibility, the petitioner must, with specific and credible evidence, demonstrate (1) past persecution on account of a statutorily listed factor, or ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals