20-1840 Perez Nagahama v. Garland BIA Straus, IJ A208 484 537 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 30th day of November, two thousand twenty- 5 two. 6 7 PRESENT: 8 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 9 JOSEPH F. BIANCO, 10 ALISON J. NATHAN, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 YUMIKO DARDANETT PEREZ NAGAHAMA, 15 AKA YUMIKO PEREZ, 16 Petitioner, 17 18 v. 20-1840 19 NAC 20 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 21 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 25 26 FOR PETITIONER: Genet Getachew, Law Office of 27 Genet Getachew, Brooklyn, NY. 28 1 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian Boynton, Acting Assistant 2 Attorney General; Cindy S. 3 Ferrier, Assistant Director; 4 Timothy G. Hayes, Senior 5 Litigation Counsel, Office of 6 Immigration Litigation, United 7 States Department of Justice, 8 Washington, DC. 9 10 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 11 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 12 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 13 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 14 Petitioner Yumiko Dardanett Perez Nagahama, a native and 15 citizen of Peru, seeks review of a May 21, 2020, decision of 16 the BIA affirming an August 8, 2018, decision of an 17 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying her application for asylum, 18 withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention 19 Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Yumiko Dardanett Perez 20 Nagahama, No. A208 484 537 (B.I.A. May 21, 2020), aff’g No. 21 A208 484 537 (Immig. Ct. Hartford Aug. 8, 2018). We assume 22 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 23 procedural history. 24 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as modified by the 25 BIA. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 426 F.3d 520, 26 522 (2d Cir. 2005). 27 2 1 I. Asylum 2 We remand for the agency to conduct the required 3 factfinding and analysis regarding the reasonableness of 4 Perez Nagahama’s delay in filing her asylum claim following 5 her changed circumstances. An asylum applicant must file an 6 asylum “application . . . within 1 year after the date of . 7 . . arrival in the United States.” 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B). 8 There is …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals