17-4134 Islam v. Garland BIA Kolbe, IJ A206 912 018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 17th day of March, two thousand twenty-one. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 BARRINGTON D. PARKER, 8 REENA RAGGI, 9 DENNY CHIN, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 JAHIRUL ISLAM, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 17-4134 17 NAC 18 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 19 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,* 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Khagendra Gharti-Chhetry, 24 Chhetry & Associates, P.C., New 25 York, NY. 26 27 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian Boyton, Acting Assistant 28 Attorney General; John S. Hogan, 29 Assistant Director; Lindsay C. 30 Dunn, Trial Attorney, Office of * The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as set forth above. 1 Immigration Litigation, U.S. 2 Department of Justice, Washington, 3 DC. 4 5 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 6 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 7 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 8 is DENIED. 9 Petitioner Jahirul Islam, a native and citizen of 10 Bangladesh, seeks review of a November 30, 2017, decision 11 of the BIA affirming a March 23, 2017, decision of an 12 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for 13 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 14 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Jahirul Islam, 15 No. A206 912 018 (B.I.A. Nov. 30, 2017), aff’g No. A206 912 16 018 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Mar. 23, 2017). We assume the 17 parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 18 procedural history. 19 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed 20 both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for the sake of 21 completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Security, 22 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2006). The applicable standards 23 of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 24 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 2 1 (2d Cir. 2018). “Considering the totality of the 2 circumstances, and all relevant factors, a trier of fact 3 may base a credibility determination on . . . the inherent 4 plausibility of the applicant’s or witness’s account, the 5 consistency between the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals