FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT YVETTE NGMENANG AKOSUNG, No. 17-72829 Petitioner, Agency No. v. A209-129-271 WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. OPINION On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted February 3, 2020 Phoenix, Arizona Filed August 14, 2020 Before: Susan P. Graber, Andrew D. Hurwitz, and Eric D. Miller, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge Miller 2 AKOSUNG V. BARR SUMMARY * Immigration Granting Yvette Akosung’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming the denial of asylum and related relief, and remanding, the panel held that substantial evidence did not support the Board’s determinations that: 1) Akosung could relocate within Cameroon to avoid future persecution or torture; 2) Akosung’s proposed social group of “women resistant to forced marriage proposals” lacked social distinction; and 3) Akosung failed to establish a clear probability of torture with government acquiescence. The panel concluded that Akosung’s ability to elude her pursuers at great effort and risk, while in hiding, did not establish that she would be able to avoid persecution or torture by relocating within Cameroon. The panel also concluded that the record did not support the Board’s determination that Akosung’s proposed social group lacked social distinction. The panel explained that to the extent the Board’s decision rested on a requirement of ocular visibility, it was inconsistent with Board precedent. The panel further concluded that to the extent the Board found that Akosung’s proposed group was not regarded as distinct in Cameroonian society, that finding was inconsistent with Akosung’s testimony. The panel rejected the government’s contention that Akosung waived any * This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. AKOSUNG V. BARR 3 challenge to the Board’s social distinction determination by redefining her proposed social group in her briefs to this court, concluding that her challenge was sufficiently presented to permit review. The panel concluded that the Board’s denial of CAT protection was flawed because the Board failed to consider evidence pertaining to government acquiescence; it placed too much weight on the absence of past torture, without taking into account evidence that Akosung avoided such harm by fleeing and going into hiding; and it limited its analysis to the threat of violence Akosung might face for resisting marriage, while overlooking the threat of violence, including possible rape, she would face if forced to marry. COUNSEL Benjamin T. Wiesinger (argued), Pope & Associates PC, Phoenix, Arizona, for Petitioner. Lindsay Pickell (argued), Attorney; Justin R. Markel, Senior Litigation Counsel; Carl H. McIntyre, Assistant Director; Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; for Respondent. 4 AKOSUNG V. BARR OPINION MILLER, Circuit Judge: Yvette Akosung fled her Cameroonian village after she was ordered to marry the village chieftain, known as the Fon. For more than a year, she lived in hiding, moving from place to place to avoid capture. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals