Ahamed

Ahamed v. Gonzales

Good Law
166 F. App'x 942
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 7, 2006No. 03-71594; Agency Nos. A75 528 042, A76 715 392, A76 715 393California516 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Didar, Monika, and Dishamoni Ahamed, natives of Bangledesh, appeal the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the BIA’s decision for substantial evidence, and may reverse the BIA’s decision only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Xiaoguang Gu v. Gonzales, 429 F.3d 1209, 1212 (9th Cir.2005). Because the BIA affirmed without opinion, we review the IJ’s decision as the final agency determination. Id.

*944 To prevail on their asylum claims under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“Act”), petitioners must establish that they are refugees. Id. (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (b)). “A ‘refugee’ is defined as an alien who is unable or unwilling to return to his home country ‘because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.’ ” Id. (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42)(A)). To establish eligibility for withholding of removal, petitioners must establish a “clear probability” that…

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.