Jose Alfredo Chiguil v. Loretta E. Lynch

Good Law
618 F. App'x 333
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 30, 201511-72221California808 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The facts and procedural posture of this case are known to the parties, and we do not repeat them here. Jose Alfredo Hernandez Chiguil filed a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming an order of removal and denying an application for asylum. For the reasons below, we dismiss the petition in part, for lack of jurisdiction, and deny the remainder of the petition.

Chiguil’s first argument — that the IJ lacked substantial evidence when it found that Chiguil did not suffer past persecution — is not properly before us. Our review of the BIA’s decision is limited to “the grounds relied upon by [the] agency.” Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir.2011) (quoting Andia v. Ashcroft, 359 F.3d 1181, 1184 (9th Cir.2004) (per curiam)). And here the BIA clearly assumed “that [Chiguil] has established past persecution ” and instead ruled against him on alternative grounds. We thus cannot review an aspect of the BIA’s decision that it assumed in Chiguil’s favor.

Chiguil next argues that the IJ lacked substantial evidence when it found that changed circumstances in Guatemala precluded any well-founded fear of future persecution. He…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.