Shiyanov v. Sessions

17-797 Shiyanov v. Sessions BIA Poczter, IJ A088 447 180 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 TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 26th day of June, two thousand eighteen. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ SERGEY ALEKSANDROVICH SHIYANOV, AKA SERGEY SHIYANOV, AKA ANTOM BAKLOV, AKA AMTOM BAYKLOV, Petitioner, v. 17-797 NAC JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ FOR PETITIONER: Richard W. Chen, New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General; John S. Hogan, Assistant Director; Matthew A. Spurlock, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. Petitioner Sergey Aleksandrovich Shiyanov, a native and citizen of Russia, seeks review of a February 16, 2017, decision of the BIA affirming an October 22, 2015, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Shiyanov’s application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Sergey Aleksandrovich Shiyanov, No. A 088 447 180 (B.I.A. Feb. 16, 2017), aff’g No. A 088 447 180 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Oct. 22, 2015). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed the IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). The standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 2 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). We find no error in the agency’s conclusion that Shiyanov failed to meet his burden of proof as to either his claim of past persecution or his fear of future persecution and torture. I. Past Persecution An applicant bears the burden of establishing eligibility for withholding of removal. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b). To establish past persecution, Shiyanov had to show that the harm he suffered rose to the level of persecution and that it was on account of his religion. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1); Beskovic v. Gonzales, 467 F.3d 223, 225-26 (2d Cir. 2006). An applicant’s ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals