NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 21a0535n.06 Case No. 20-3236 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED ) Nov 22, 2021 RANI L. KARIM, DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) Petitioner ) ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW v. ) FROM THE UNITED STATES ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, ) APPEALS Respondent ) Before: BOGGS, WHITE, and READLER, Circuit Judges. CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Rani Karim is a Christian and an Iraqi citizen. He alleges that he faces the threat of religious persecution if removed to Iraq. An immigration judge agreed and granted Karim’s request for withholding of removal, which generally ensures that Karim will not be returned to Iraq as long as Christians are persecuted in that country. But Karim prefers another form of relief—asylum—because it confers additional benefits like the ability to travel outside the United States and apply for permanent residency. The judge, however, denied asylum due to Karim’s credibility issues. On four occasions, Karim has asked the Board of Immigration Appeals to reverse that denial. And on each occasion, the Board refused. Seeing no abuse of discretion in the Board’s latest determination, we deny the petition. Case No. 20-3236, Karim v. Garland BACKGROUND Rani Karim was born in Iraq and remained there for over two decades. In September 2002, Karim traveled to Jordan, where he met a woman from the United States. Days later, the couple became engaged. Karim’s fiancée returned to the United States and secured a visa on Karim’s behalf. On the authority of that visa, Karim entered the United States in 2003. But his impending marriage quickly fell through, and Karim overstayed his visa. He was ordered removed to Iraq but promptly filed an application for asylum, 8 U.S.C. § 1158, withholding of removal, id. § 1231(b)(3), and protection under the Convention Against Torture, 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c). In his application, Karim claimed that, due to his Christian faith, he would face persecution at the hands of Muslims were he returned to Iraq. The asylum officer who conducted Karim’s initial interview found that Karim “presented testimony that was believable, consistent and sufficiently detailed. Therefore, he was found to be credible.” But the officer concluded that, because the incidents described by Karim did not rise to the level of persecution, he failed to demonstrate either that “anyone [in Iraq] is inclined to harm him on account of his religion” or that the threat of persecution existed countrywide. So the officer found Karim ineligible for asylum and referred his case to an Immigration Judge (IJ). At his hearing before the IJ, Karim testified that he had been beaten, arrested, detained, and threatened with death while living in Iraq, all on account of his faith. The IJ, however, determined that Karim’s application and testimony were inconsistent in critical ways. One, Karim’s application claimed that he convalesced at home for ten days after being beaten by Muslims, yet he testified that his injuries were so severe he needed to recover at …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals