Ravi Sapkota v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Ravi Prasad Sapkota petitions for a review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his application for asylum. We review questions of law de novo and the BIA’s factual findings, including whether an applicant was persecuted on account of his “political opinion,” for substantial evidence. See I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Under the substantial evidence standard, the Court must uphold the BIA’s findings unless “the evidence [the applicant] presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” Id. 502 U.S. at 483-84 , 112 S.Ct. 812 .

To be eligible for asylum, Sapkota must establish that he suffered past persecution or has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42)(A). In order to demonstrate past persecution, an applicant must show:

Zhiqiang Hu v. Holder, 652 F.3d 1011, 1016 (9th Cir.2011) (quoting Mengstu v. Holder, 560 F.3d 1055, 1058 (9th Cir. 2009)).

Sapkota failed to establish that he was harmed “on…