FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 29 2019 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS GAYANE MARTIROSYAN, No. 17-70919 Petitioner, Agency No. A206-267-383 v. ORDER WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. Before: McKEOWN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. The Memorandum Disposition, filed on March 20, 2019, and reported at 765 Fed.Appx. 196 (9th Cir. 2019), is amended as follows: At 765 F. App’x at 197, the subsection heading and the first full paragraph beginning with <When we review> and ending with <Bhattarai, 835 F.3d at 1043.> are deleted. A citation to Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1094 (9th Cir. 2009) is added to the next paragraph. At 765 F. App’x at 197–98, the sentences beginning with <Both her oral> and ending with <the declaration.> are amended to read as follows: “Both her oral testimony and her written declaration compel a conclusion that two officers were present. Further, Martirosyan adequately explained any possible inconsistency as due to translation error.” At 765 F. App’x at 198, the subsection heading and the first full paragraph beginning with <An applicant for asylum> and ending with <Ren, 648 F.3d at 1090–93.> are deleted. The second full paragraph beginning with <Here, the IJ> and ending with <Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir. 2000).> is deleted and replaced with the following sentence: “Third, the record compels the conclusion that the corroborating evidence requested by the IJ was reasonably unavailable and duplicative, so the failure to produce that evidence could not support an adverse credibility finding.” The following paragraph is added: “[I]t is apparent” from this record “that the IJ and BIA have listed all possible reasons to support an adverse credibility determination, and they are inadequate in law or not supported by substantial evidence.” Soto-Olarte, 555 F.3d at 1095. In other words, “it is evident that the IJ and BIA have both strained to provide reasons properly supporting an adverse credibility finding, but despite their best efforts have been unable to do so.” Id. at 1094–95. Accordingly, we deem Martirosyan credible on remand. Lastly, <hold that she was credible> in the final sentence is amended to <deem her credible>. A clean copy of the amended memorandum disposition is attached to this order. With these amendments, Judges McKeown, W. Fletcher, and Murguia have voted to deny the petition for panel rehearing (Dkt. No. 38). The petition for 2 rehearing is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc may be filed. 3 FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 29 2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GAYANE MARTIROSYAN, No. 17-70919 Petitioner, Agency No. A206-267-383 v. AMENDED MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted February 12, 2019 San Francisco, California Before: McKEOWN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Gayane Martirosyan petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals