Grigoryan

Grigoryan v. Gonzales

Good Law
125 F. App'x 829
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 2005Nos. 03-71453, A75-597-437, A75-597-438, A75-597-439, A75-597-440, A75-597-441California1,199 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Karen Grigoryan, his wife, Sona Arustamyan, and their three children, Tehmine, *831 Arsen and Mher Grigoryan, petition for review of the denial of their claims for asylum and withholding of removal to Armenia. They also challenge the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”)’s denial of their motion to remand their case for consideration of new evidence and a claim under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

I.

Karen Grigoryan applied for asylum on the ground that he had suffered persecution on the basis of his economic philosophy and perceived opposition to certain Armenian government officials. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) held that he could not review Grigoryan’s claim for asylum because Grigoryan had filed his application on behalf of himself and his family more than one year after he entered the United States and no exception applied to excuse the untimely filing. 2 See INA § 208(a)(2)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(2)(B). We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination that Karen Grigoryan’s application for asylum was untimely and that no changed or extraordinary circumstances excused the late filing. See INA § 208(a)(8), 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3). Because the…

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.