21-6137 Musthafa v. Garland BIA Navarro, IJ A208 097 184 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 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 16th day of December, two thousand twenty- 5 two. 6 7 PRESENT: 8 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., 9 WILLIAM J. NARDINI, 10 EUNICE C. LEE, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 MOHAMED IRFAN SHAHUL HAMEED 15 MUSTHAFA, 16 Petitioner, 17 18 v. 21-6137 19 NAC 20 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 21 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 25 FOR PETITIONER: Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran,Esq., 26 Law Office of Visuvanathan 27 Rudrakumaran, New York, NY. 28 1 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian Boynton, Acting Assistant 2 Attorney General; Anna E. Juarez, 3 Senior Litigation Counsel; Evan P. 4 Schultz, Trial Attorney, Office of 5 Immigration Litigation, United 6 States Department of Justice, 7 Washington, DC. 8 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 9 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 10 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 11 is DENIED. 12 Petitioner Mohamed Irfan Shahul Hameed Musthafa, a native 13 and citizen of Sri Lanka, seeks review of a February 11, 2021, 14 decision of the BIA affirming a March 9, 2018, decision of an 15 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum 16 and withholding of removal. 1 In re Mohamed Irfan Shahul 17 Hameed Musthafa, No. A 208 097 184 (B.I.A. Feb. 11, 2021), 18 aff’g No. A 208 097 184 (Immigr. Ct. N.Y. City Mar. 9, 2018). 19 We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts 20 and procedural history. 21 We construe the Government’s motion for summary denial 22 as its brief because Musthafa has filed his brief, and we 1 The IJ granted withholding and deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, and the BIA did not disturb that ruling. 2 1 review the petition on its merits. See United States 2 v. Davis, 598 F.3d 10, 13–14 (2d Cir. 2010) (holding that 3 summary denial is “a rare exception” limited to “truly 4 frivolous” appeals). Musthafa argues that the agency erred 5 in declining to consider asylum and withholding of removal 6 based on religion and imputed political opinion and in 7 declining to remand to permit him …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals