Patatanyan

Patatanyan v. Ashcroft

Good Law
89 F. App'x 19
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 2004No. 02-74082California927 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rafik Patatanyan, his wife Loreta Garibyan, and their children Edgar and Vahe Patatanyan, petition for review of the denial of their motion to reopen and reconsider. We grant the petition, reverse, and remand to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) for further proceedings.

In December 2000, Rafik Patatanyan filed a Notice of Appeal (Form EOIR-26), on behalf of himself and his family, contesting the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) de *20 nial of their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture on the ground that they had suffered persecution in Armenia for their Evangelical Christian beliefs. On Form EOIR-26, Rafik Patatanyan filled in the box indicating that he would file a separate written brief in support of the appeal.

The BIA notified the Patatanyans that their brief was due on June 18, 2001. In April 2002, the BIA summarily dismissed the Patatanyans’ appeal because they did not file a brief within the deadline “or reasonably explain [their] failure to do so.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (d)(2)(i)(E). The BIA also determined that it could not hear the Patatanyans’ appeal in the absence of a brief because they did…

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.