Shiva Subedi v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

1. Because the Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA) conducted its own review of the evidence and law, our review is limited to the BIA’s decision. Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106, 1113-14 (9th Cir.2013). “Without knowing the basis of the [BIA’s] decision, we cannot conduct a meaningful review” of it. Delgado v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1095, 1108 (9th Cir.2011) (en banc).

We cannot determine on this record whether the BIA’s asylum determination that the harm that Subedi suffered did not rise to the level of past persecution is supported by substantial evidence. The BIA’s determination with regard to this issue consisted of a simple conclusion. The BIA did not provide any reasoning, explanation, or analysis for its conclusion. More specifically, we cannot determine whether the BIA took into account all of Subedi’s harm, individually and cumulatively, see Guo v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1194, 1203 (9th Cir.2004); whether the BIA engaged in impermissible fact finding (because it is unclear whether the immigration judge made a past persecution finding), see Ridore v. Holder, 696 F.3d 907, 915 (9th Cir.2012); or whether the BIA applied the correct legal standard, see Cordon-Garcia v. INS,…