Alcon-Ailon

MEMORANDUM **

Rosenda Alcon-Ailon (“Alcon”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration *32 Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her applications for asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208(a) and 243(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158 (a) and 1253(h). We grant the petition and remand to the BIA for a determination of whether Alcon was credible and whether she is eligible for the requested relief.

Alcon contends that the BIA erred in concluding that, even assuming she was credible, she had failed to establish that her kidnaping and rape by guerrillas was politically motivated. We agree.

Because motive is difficult to prove, an applicant does not have to provide direct evidence that her persecutors were motivated by one of the protected grounds. Gafoor v. INS, 231 F.3d 645, 651 (9th Cir.2000). Rather, “compelling circumstantial evidence is sufficient.” Id. at 650 . An applicant need only “produce evidence from which it is reasonable to believe that the harm was motivated, at least in part, by an actual or implied protected ground.” Borja v. INS, 175 F.3d 732, 736 (9th Cir. 1999) (en…