NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 20 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RANJIT SINGH GHOTRA, No. 15-73146 Petitioner, Agency No. A088-734-492 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 15, 2017** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Ranjit Singh Ghotra, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. In assessing Ghotra’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the BIA did * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). not have the benefit of Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351 (9th Cir. 2017), which holds that the “one central reason” standard applies to asylum but not to withholding of removal. In addition, the BIA did not address whether the proposed particular social group was cognizable. Because the BIA’s rejection of Ghotra’s ineffective assistance claim relies in part on the agency’s underlying denial of withholding of removal for failure to show “one central reason” and because the BIA did not address whether Ghotra’s proposed particular social group is cognizable, we remand for the BIA to address his ineffective assistance claim. PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED. 2 15-73146 15-73146 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Ranjit Ghotra v. Jefferson Sessions 20 November 2017 Agency Unpublished 1953ff3a2ae135092aa16ffd60bb0a745e101162
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals