NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 1 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JAMES LEONARD REYNAGA No. 18-71821 ESTELLA, Agency No. A046-871-093 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted January 13, 2021 Pasadena, California Before: FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges, and EZRA,** District Judge. Petitioner James Leonard Reynaga Estella (“Petitioner”) is a native and citizen of Peru. He petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) in which the BIA: (1) dismissed his appeal of the decision of * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable David A. Ezra, United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation. Immigration Judge Lee A. O’Connor (“IJ O’Connor”), denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal, and (2) denied his claim that IJ O’Connor violated his right to procedural due process claim. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the BIA’s denials of asylum and withholding for substantial evidence, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184–85 (9th Cir. 2006), and the due process determination de novo, Rodriguez-Lariz v. I.N.S., 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir. 2002), and deny the petition. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and history of this matter, we repeat them only briefly. After he was charged with removability, Petitioner applied for asylum and withholding of removal relief in 2006 based on membership in a protected social group. He was denied relief in proceedings before Immigration Judge Ted. A. White (“IJ White”). Since then, we have remanded Petitioner’s case to the BIA twice, most recently in 2015 “to determine the impact, if any,” of this court’s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2014), [and] the BIA’s decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Estella v. Holder, 598 F. App’x 527, 527–28 (9th Cir. 2015). Following that remand, the BIA sent the case to IJ O’Connor “for further proceedings not 2 inconsistent with the Ninth Circuit’s order” and observed that “further fact-finding may be needed.” IJ O’Connor held hearings on April 6, 2016, and November 17, 2016, and denied Petitioner relief on January 5, 2017. The BIA affirmed IJ O’Connor’s decision and rejected Petitioner’s claim that IJ O’Connor prejudicially violated Petitioner’s due process rights by exhibiting bias in the November 17, 2016 hearing and refusing to accept additional testimony and other evidence after deadlines had passed. To qualify for asylum, an applicant must establish that “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion was or …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals