Purnomo

Purnomo v. Holder

Good Law
347 F. App'x 324
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 1, 2009No. 06-75601California420 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Kristiani Purnomo, her husband Hoo Sehoko Iffan Augusta, aka Iffan Augusta Hoo Sehoko, and their two children, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications 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, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir.2009), and deny in part and grant in part the petition for review.

The IJ found that Purnomo and Hoo Sehoko’s asylum claims were time-barred and denied the children’s asylum claim on the merits. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s time-bar finding but did not address the merits denial. The record does not compel the conclusion that the changed circumstances or extraordinary circumstances exceptions excused Purnomo and Hoo Sehoko’s untimely applications. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4 (a)(4), (5); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 648, 657-58 (9th Cir. *326 2007) (per curiam). We grant the petition for review with respect to the children’s asylum claims…

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.