PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 20-2270 ______________ THAMOTHARAM PILLAI THAYALAN, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ____________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A203-596-281) Immigration Judge: Pallavi S. Shirole ____________ Argued: January 29, 2021 Before: RESTREPO, BIBAS, and PORTER, Circuit Judges. (Filed: May 10, 2021) ____________ Brian J. Slipakoff [Argued] Duane Morris LLP 30 South 17th Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Counsel for Petitioner Thamotharam Pillai Thayalan Anthony C. Payne Jennifer A. Bowen [Argued] Raya Jarawan United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 878, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Counsel for Respondent Attorney General of the United States of America ____________ OPINION OF THE COURT ____________ PORTER, Circuit Judge. Thamotharam Pillai Thayalan is a native and citizen of Sri Lanka. On July 10, 2019, he was apprehended in California after illegally entering the United States. The Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings, and Thayalan sought relief from removal in the form of asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). 2 Thayalan testified that in 2007, when he was about six- teen years old, he was kidnapped and blindfolded by members of the Sri Lankan army and taken to an army camp. While he was detained, soldiers hit his head against a wall and punched him in the stomach. He claims that this mistreatment consti- tutes past persecution, entitling him to a presumption of a well- founded fear of future persecution. Thayalan also claims a well-founded fear of future persecution based on two incidents in 2019, when members of the Eelam People’s Democratic Party (“EPDP”) of Sri Lanka tried to extort money from him. Thayalan maintains that he was targeted for extortion because of the EPDP’s false belief that he financially supported a rival political party. The agency credited Thayalan’s testimony, but ordered his removal to Sri Lanka. The agency determined that (1) the Sri Lankan army’s mistreatment of Thayalan did not rise to the level of persecution, and (2) the EPDP members targeted Thayalan for extortion because they wanted his money, not because of disapproval of any political opinion. As a result, Thayalan failed to meet his burden of showing past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a ground protected by the INA and thus was ineligible for both asylum and withholding of removal. Thayalan petitions for review of the order of removal. He contends that the agency’s past-persecution determination contravenes this Court’s precedents and that substantial evi- dence does not support the agency’s determination about what motivated the EPDP’s extortion efforts. We disagree with Thayalan on both counts, so we will deny the petition. 3 I A Thayalan was apprehended near the United States– Mexico border after making an illegal entry. Thayalan expressed to an asylum officer a fear of returning to Sri Lanka. The asylum officer found that Thayalan had demonstrated a …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals