Emma Petrosyan v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

Emma Petrosyan, a native of the former Soviet Union and a citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“Board”) April 30, 2013 ruling that she filed a frivolous asylum application. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the Board’s determination that an applicant knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application de novo “for compliance with the procedural framework outlined by the BIA.” Kulakchyan v. Holder, 730 F.3d 993, 995 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam) (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Khadka v. Holder, 618 F.3d 996, 1002 (9th Cir. 2010)). We review administrative findings of fact for substantial evidence. Zhang v. Gonzales, 408 F.3d 1239, 1244 (9th Cir. 2005). For the reasons set forth below, we deny Petrosyan’s petition for review.

Pursuant to In re Y-L, 24 I. & N. Dec. 151, 155 (BIA 2007), the Board may find an asylum application to be frivolous only if it complies with several procedural safeguards. Those requirements include:

Id. The Ninth Circuit expressly adopted that framework in Ahir v. Mukasey, 527 F.3d 912, 917 (9th Cir. 2008).

Here, the record makes clear that the Board…