Bororing

Bororing v. Holder

Good Law
329 F. App'x 169
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 23, 2009No. 06-73888California305 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mario Roberto Bororing, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of *170 the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 924 (9th Cir.2004), and deny the petition for review.

The agency denied Bororing’s asylum claim as time-barred. Bororing does not challenge this finding in his opening brief.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding of no past persecution because Bororing testified that neither he nor his family were harmed before they departed Indonesia, see Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2003), and Bororing did not demonstrate that the deaths of two distant uncles were part of a “pattern of persecution closely tied to” Bororing, see Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060 (9th Cir.2009). Furthermore, substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that even if the disfavored group analysis set forth in Sael applies to ethnic Indonesian Christians,…

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.