Sharma

Sharma v. Ashcroft

Good Law
119 F. App'x 75
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 15, 2004No. 03-71060; Agency Nos. A71-628-649, A71-628-650California331 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Suraj Prakash Sharma and Swarn Bala Sharma, natives and citizens of India, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“U”) denial of their application for asylum and withholding of deportation. The petitioners also challenge the BIA’s denial of relief pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to former 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). See Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997). Because the BIA adopted the IJ’s decision and gave reasons of its own, we review both decisions. See Kataria v. INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1112 (9th Cir.2000). Reviewing for substantial evidence, see Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000), we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision because, assuming Sharma established past persecution, a preponderance of the evidence nevertheless establishes that it would be reasonable for him to relocate in order to avoid future persecution. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13 (b)(3). The IJ properly considered background material on India to determine that the petitioners could reasonably relocate. See…

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.