17-597 Umirov v. Whitaker 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. 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 12th day of December, two thousand eighteen. PRESENT: PETER W. HALL, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, GERARD E. LYNCH, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ RUSLAN UMIROV, AKA RUSLAN UMIROVA, Petitioner, v. 17-597 NAC MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ FOR PETITIONER: Nicole Abruzzo Hemrick, Law Offices of Spar & Bernstein, P.C., New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General; Terri J. Scadron, Senior Litigation Counsel; Stefanie Notarino Hennes, 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 Ruslan Umirov, a native of the former Soviet Union who was born in what is now Kazakhstan,1 seeks review of a February 1, 2017, decision of the BIA affirming an April 19, 2016, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Ruslan Umirov, No. A 088 427 970 (B.I.A. Feb. 1, 2017), aff’g No. A 088 427 970 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Apr. 19, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. We note at the outset that Umirov only challenges the 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 withholding of removal and CAT relief. Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 541 n.1 (2d Cir. 2005) (providing that issues not raised in an opening brief are waived). The agency denied asylum on two alternative bases: Umirov failed to timely file his application and, assuming timely filing, he failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution in Kazakhstan. Because the timeliness ruling is dispositive, we decline to reach the agency’s alternative burden determination. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals