Gomes

Gomes v. Gonzales

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 200503-73683California1,569 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARK STEPHEN GOMES; SWORNA  No. 03-73683

JACINTA GOMES; METHEW GOMES,

Petitioners, Agency Nos. v.  A70-641-041

A70-641-042

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney A70-641-043 General,

OPINION

Respondent.  On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted September 15, 2005* Pasadena, California

Filed December 6, 2005

Before: J. Clifford Wallace, Barry G. Silverman, and Consuelo M. Callahan, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Callahan

*The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argu- ment pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

15745 GOMES v. GONZALES 15747

COUNSEL

Garish Sarin, Los Angeles, California, for the petitioners.

Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Norah Ascoli Schwarz, and John A. Nolet, Washington, D.C., for the respondent.

OPINION

CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge:

Petitioners, Mark and Sworna Gomes and their son, Methew, natives and citizens of Bangladesh and members of the Catholic faith, seek asylum or withholding of…

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.