18-3406 Smajlaj v. Garland BIA Poctzer, IJ A208 752 127/128 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. 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 10th day of March, two thousand twenty-two. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JOHN M. WALKER, JR., 8 ROSEMARY S. POOLER, 9 MICHAEL H. PARK, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 ALTIN SMAJLAJ, LUIZA SMAJLAJ, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 18-3406 17 NAC 18 MERRICK B. GARLAND 19 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 20 Respondent. 1 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Michael P. DiRaimondo, DiRaimondo 24 & Masi, PC, Bohemia, NY. 1Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General Merrick B. Garland is automatically substituted as Respondent. 1 2 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney 3 General; Shelley R. Goad, 4 Assistant Director; Jennifer A. 5 Singer, Trial Attorney, Office of 6 Immigration Litigation, United 7 States Department of Justice, 8 Washington, DC. 9 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 10 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 11 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 12 is DENIED. 13 Petitioners Altin Smajlaj and Luiza Smajlaj, natives and 14 citizens of Albania, seek review of an October 16, 2018 15 decision of the BIA affirming a July 19, 2017 decision of an 16 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Smajlaj’s application for 17 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 18 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Altin Smajlaj, No. 19 A 208 752 127/128 (B.I.A. Oct. 16, 2018), aff’g No. A 208 752 20 127/128 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City July 19, 2017). We assume the 21 parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural 22 history. 23 We have considered both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions 24 “for the sake of completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep’t of 25 Homeland Security, 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2006). The 2 1 standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 2 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 3 (2d Cir. 2018). “Considering the totality of the 4 circumstances, and all relevant factors, a trier of fact may 5 base a credibility determination on the demeanor, candor, or 6 responsiveness of the applicant . . . , the consistency 7 …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals