Chaddha
Chaddha v. Gonzales
Opinion
Dissenting Opinion
Kleinfeld, J.
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent.
Chaddha’s testimony recounts brutality at the hands of Indian law-enforcement. But being subjected to such treatment does not by itself make him eligible for withholding from removal. The police abuses cannot be the foundation for relief unless they were employed against him for a statutorily prohibited reason, such as his political opinions. 1 Illegitimate police behavior in pursuit of other goals, evidently to find another individual with a similar name suspected of arms dealing or to locate Sikh militants with whom Mr. Chaddha attended college, does not make him eligible for relief.
Mr. Chaddha’s testimony does not compel an inference that the police cared about his politics or imputed political opinions, only that they thought he could lead them to the other Chadha or to terrorists.
. Dinu v. Ashcroft, 372 F.3d 1041, 1044 (9th Cir.2004).
. Id.
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Rahul Chaddha, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision, which summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We dismiss in part, deny in part and grant and remand in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Chaddha did not file for asylum within one year of entering the United States, see Hakeem v. INS, 278 F.3d 812, 815-16 (9th Cir.2001); 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3), or whether extraordinary circumstances excused the late filing, see Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2002). We dismiss Chaddha’s petition for review on the timeliness of his asylum claim.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over the remaining claims. We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s decision to deny withholding of removal, Hakeem, 273 F.3d at 816, and relief under CAT, Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1193 (9th Cir.2003).
The IJ concluded that Chaddha failed to demonstrate a nexus between the government’s conduct and a…