Aleksanyan

Aleksanyan v. Gonzales

Good Law
124 F. App'x 558
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 11, 2005Nos. 03-71172, A75-688899, A75-688-900California464 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Tamara Aleksanyan and her son Rafik Isahakyan are natives and citizens of Armenia. They petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of their application for asylum. 1 Because the BIA streamlined its review of the IJ’s decision, we review the IJ’s decision as the agency’s final action on the merits. Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 850 F.3d 845 , 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels a result contrary to the agency’s. Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 861-62 (9th Cir.2001).

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Petitioners failed to establish a nexus between the events that happened *560 to them in Armenia and a statutory ground, including political opinion or imputed political opinion. Several members of the Armenian parliament, including one for whom the lead Petitioner’s husband worked as a driver, were assassinated in the fall of 1999. Seven days later, the husband failed to return home. Then, the following day, the lead Petitioner inquired of the government as to her husband’s whereabouts, and…

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.