Martik Sargsyan v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

MEMORANDUM *

Kristine and Martik Sargsyan appeal the Board of Immigration Appeal’s denial of their petition for asylum and withholding of removal. We remand.

The parties are familiar with the facts. Petitioners, Kristine and Martik Sargsyan, are natives and citizens of Arménia. Both are members of the Baha’i faith who claim they have faced persecution in Armenia because of their religion. They are requesting asylum in the United States, where their parents have already been granted asylum. In support of their applications for relief and protection, the petitioners offered testimony and documentary evidence at their removal hearing. The Board issued its own opinion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (e)(5).

We review the relevant legal conclusions de novo. Hamazaspyan v. Holder, 590 *734 F.3d 744, 747 (9th Cir.2009). The IJ’s factual findings are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Lopez-Rodriguez v. Mukasey, 536 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th Cir.2008). Because the Board affirmed the IJ’s decision and added its own reasons, this court reviews both decisions. Kat aria v. INS., 232 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir.2000); Avetova-Elisseva v. INS., 213 F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir.2000) (the…

concurring:

I concur in full in the disposition, but write separately to emphasize my concern with the BIA’s failure to reconcile its decision with the fact that the petitioners’ parents were previously granted asylum based on the same underlying events. This is particularly concerning given that the rejection of the petitioners’ withholding of removal claim was predicated on an adverse credibility finding. This case is subject to pre-REAL ID Act law regarding the valid bases for an adverse credibility determination, meaning that an adverse credibility determination can only be validly supported by inconsistencies if those inconsistencies go to the heart of the claim. Cortez-Pineda v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1118 , 1124 & n. 7 (9th Cir.2010). It would seem that the heart of petitioners’ claim has much in common with the heart of the claim on which petitioners’ parents were already granted asylum. Rejection of petitioners’ withholding of removal claim may very well be reconcilable with the previous *735 grant of asylum to petitioners’ parents, but the BIA should at least make that reconciliation explicit on remand.

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 04 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARTIK SARGSYAN; KRISTINE No. 08-72040

SARGSYAN,

Agency Nos. A078-249-396 Petitioners, A078-364-947

v.

MEMORANDUM *

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted November 7, 2012 San Francisco, California

Before: FARRIS, NOONAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Kristine and Martik Sargsyan appeal the Board of Immigration Appeal’s

denial of their petition for asylum and withholding of removal. We remand.

The parties are familiar with the facts. Petitioners, Kristine and Martik

Sargsyan, are natives and citizens of Armenia. Both are members of the Baha’i

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. faith who claim they have faced persecution in Armenia because of their religion.

They are requesting asylum in the United States, where their…