Murithia

Murithia v. Holder

Good Law
364 F. App'x 321
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 25, 201005-74924California533 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Dorcas Wangari Murithia, a citizen of Kenya, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . The sole issue before us is whether the likelihood that Murithia may be forced to undergo female genital mutilation (FGM) in Kenya entitles her to remain in this country. After reviewing the factual findings for substantial evidence, see Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir.2006), we deny the petition for review.

In 2000, Murithia petitioned for asylum and withholding of removal, asserting a well-founded fear of being forced to undergo FGM if returned to Kenya. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 208.13 . The BIA concluded Murithia had not established a well-founded fear she would be forced to undergo FGM because (1) Murithia’s twin sister had remained in Kenya and had not been forced to undergo the procedure; (2) the 2003 Country Report stated that the Kenyan government had outlawed the forced practice of FGM on women; (3) the 2003 Country Report stated that FGM is usually…

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.