Nangoy

Nangoy v. Holder

Good Law
426 F. App'x 565
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 12, 2011No. 08-71655California384 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Bobby Henny Nangoy and his son Bobby Alberto Nangoy, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.2009). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.

The IJ denied petitioners’ asylum applications as time-barred. Petitioners do not challenge this dispositive finding in their opening brief.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that petitioners did not suffer past persecution because even considered cumulatively, the harassment and threats endured by them and their family members, and the suspected poisoning and beating of their dog did not rise to the level of persecution. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1059-60 ; Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2003). Further, the record does not compel the conclusion that there is a pattern or practice of perse *566…

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.