17-597 Umirov v. Sessions BIA Christensen, IJ A088 427 970 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 14th day of January, two thousand nineteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 PETER W. HALL, 8 DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, 9 GERARD E. LYNCH, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 RUSLAN UMIROV, AKA RUSLAN 14 UMIROVA, 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 17-597 18 NAC 19 MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, 20 ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 21 GENERAL, 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 25 FOR PETITIONER: Nicole Abruzzo Hemrick, Law 26 Offices of Spar & Bernstein, P.C., 27 New York, NY. 28 29 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 30 Attorney General; Terri J. 31 Scadron, Senior Litigation 32 Counsel; Stefanie Notarino Hennes, 1 Trial Attorney, Office of 2 Immigration Litigation, United 3 States Department of Justice, 4 Washington, DC. 5 6 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 7 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 8 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 9 is DENIED. 10 Petitioner Ruslan Umirov, a native of the former Soviet 11 Union who was born in what is now Kazakhstan,1 seeks review 12 of a February 1, 2017, decision of the BIA affirming an April 13 19, 2016, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his 14 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief 15 under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Ruslan 16 Umirov, No. A 088 427 970 (B.I.A. Feb. 1, 2017), aff’g No. A 17 088 427 970 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 19, 2016). We assume 18 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 19 procedural history in this case. 20 We note at the outset that Umirov only challenges the 21 agency’s denial of asylum, and has thus waived his claims for 1 Umirov argues that he is not a citizen of Kazakhstan. The agency found the record of Umirov’s citizenship inconclusive and ordered him removed to Kazakhstan because it was where he lived before coming to the United States and the location of his birth. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(2)(E)(iii), (vi). 2 1 withholding of removal and CAT relief. Yueqing Zhang v. 2 Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 541 n.1 (2d Cir. 2005) (providing ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals