Litmanovich

Litmanovich v. Ashcroft

Good Law
94 F. App'x 578
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 6, 2004No. 02-74247California568 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The Litmanovich family, natives of Russia and Uzbekistan and citizens of Israel, petition for review of the denial of their applications for asylum and withholding of deportation. Exercising our jurisdiction under § 242(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(1), we deny the petition.

“Where, as here, the BIA has reviewed the IJ’s decision and incorporated portions of it as its own, we treat the incorporated parts of the IJ’s decision as the BIA’s.” Molina-Estrada v. INS., 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2002). We review the decision of the BIA under the substantial evidence standard. Baballah v. Ashcroft, 335 F.3d 981, 987 (9th Cir.2003). The decision “must be upheld if supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (quotation marks omitted).

First, with regard to Petitioners’ asylum claims, the record does not compel us to disagree with the BIA’s decision. See Halaim v. INS, 358 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir.2004). In Halaim , we were not compelled to find past persecution where the petitioners were subjected to…

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.