Igna

MEMORANDUM

Viorica, Viorel, and Magdalena Igna (the “Ignas”), citizens and natives of Romania, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We grant the petition for review and remand.

The IJ found the Ignas’ testimony credible. He then stated, “Assuming arguendo the incident took, place in Roseani as alleged, the Asylum Officer found that what happened to the respondent and co-respondent amounted to persecution and indeed if it happened as they described it, it would be persecution.” Because the IJ found petitioners credible, the IJ should not have merely “assumed arguendo” that the incident took place “as alleged”; rather, because petitioners were credible, the IJ was required to find that the incident happened as they described it. The IJ found that the incident, as described, was “persecution.” Further, the IJ noted that past persecution based on religion can be established even if religious beliefs are only one of several motivations…