NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 21-1283 ____________ GEORGE AMOS MECHEO; DAN MAGARA MECHEO; J.O. M., Petitioners v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency Nos. A089-913-038; A089-913-039 & A089-913-040) Immigration Judge: R.K. Malloy Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) On March 31, 2022 Before: RESTREPO, ROTH and FUENTES, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: February 17, 2023) O P I N I ON* * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. ROTH, Circuit Judge: Lead Petitioner George Mecheo and his sons Dan and J.O.M., seek review of a final decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued on January 13, 2021. In its decision, the BIA dismissed Petitioners’ appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (IJ) decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the regulations implementing the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Petitioners challenge the BIA’s holding that there was no clear error in the IJ’s credibility determination. They argue that the BIA and IJ failed to consider that Mecheo’s story shifted because he was relying on information from third parties and was not in Kenya to witness events personally. They also argue that the BIA erred by 1) by rejecting their challenge to the IJ’s CAT findings, 2) by relying on Kenyan law to conclude that J.O.M. would be entitled to dual citizenship without providing advance notice of this determination, and 3) by refusing to remand proceedings to the IJ for further consideration of Dan’s independent application for asylum. Because these arguments are all without merit, we will deny the petition for review. I. Mecheo and his sons, Dan and J.O.M., are citizens of Kenya who were admitted to the United States on or about December 23, 2007, with authorization to remain in the United States for a temporary period ending June 20, 2008. Because they remained in the United States past June 20, 2008, the government initiated removal proceedings in October 2008. Petitioners originally appeared in removal proceedings on November 18, 2 2008 where they conceded removability. However, they sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protections. At a 2010 merits hearing, the Lead Petitioner, Mecheo, testified that he was seeking asylum due to the 2007–08 Kenyan elections, claiming that a new political party had come into power and “attacked [his] family” and killed his father.1 He explained that the people responsible for his father’s death were members of the People’s National Union (PNU) party and the Orange Democratic Party (ODM), while his family belonged to the “old regime,” specifically the Kenya African National Union (KANU). He testified that he could not return to Kenya because he had no home to which he could return and that he believed his life would be in danger. Although Mecheo indicated that many members of his father’s former political party, the KANU, were “internally …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals