Karmacharya

Karmacharya v. Holder

Good Law
356 F. App'x 65
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 2009No. 05-72754California379 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Kumar Bahadur Karmachar-ya, a native and citizen of Nepal, appeals the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”), adopted and affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), in which Karmacharya was denied asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

The IJ found Karmacharya’s asylum application time-barred because it was not filed within one year of arrival. The IJ also found that Karmacharya had not demonstrated the “extraordinary circumstances” required for late filing. 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(2)(D). This court has jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision that an asylum application does not qualify for one of the exceptions to the one year bar, when, as here, that determination is based on undisputed facts. Fakhry v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th Cir.2008) (citing Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 654 (9th Cir.2007)).

We conclude that the IJ and BIA failed properly to address the claim that “changed circumstances” excused the untimely filing of Karmacharya’s application, and we remand to the BIA to address this question in the first instance. Although Karmacharya consistently asserted that 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.