FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT July 28, 2020 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court ZULQURNAIN MALIK, Petitioner, v. No. 19-9586 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before HOLMES, KELLY, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Zulqurnain Malik, a native and citizen of Pakistan appearing pro se, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA’s) decision dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) removal order. Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), we deny the petition. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. BACKGROUND In 2007, while in Pakistan, Malik converted from the Muslim faith to the Christian faith when he married his Christian wife. Six years later, in September 2013, he came to the United States with his wife and was admitted as a lawful permanent resident. In 2018, he was convicted in Utah state court of, among other things, possessing or using methamphetamine, and he was given a 365-day sentence. The Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings. Malik opposed removal, seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) because he feared persecution in Pakistan for converting to Christianity. In April 2019, Malik appeared pro se before an IJ, who found him removable based on his controlled-substance offense. In support of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, Malik testified that he had never been harmed while living in Pakistan, and that his wife, who returned to Pakistan in 2016, has never been harmed there. Malik expressed his fear, however, that if he returned to Pakistan he would be killed by his family or imprisoned and executed by the government due to his conversion. The IJ denied Malik’s application and ordered him removed to Pakistan. In doing so, the IJ noted that Malik had identified no past persecution. As for fear of future persecution, the IJ found insufficient evidence that either Malik’s family or the Pakistani government would view his religious conversion as a violation of the country’s blasphemy laws or a reason to otherwise harm him. The IJ found it significant that neither the Pakistani government nor his family had harmed him in any way for the six 2 years he lived in Pakistan after converting to Christianity. Further, the IJ found that he had the ability to relocate to another town to avoid harm from his family. Finally, the IJ found there was insufficient ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals