Rostum

Rostum v. Keisler

Good Law
243 F. App'x 333
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 27, 2007Nos. 05-75934, 06-72634California433 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

In these consolidated petitions, Waheid Talaat Rostum seeks review of two Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders, one dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying Rostum’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and the other denying his motion to reopen proceedings. *335 To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for substantial evidence, Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000), we deny the petition for review in No. 05-75934. Reviewing for abuse of discretion, Malty v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004), we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review in No. 06-72634.

Contrary to Rostum’s contention, the record does not compel a finding that the Egyptian government was unable or unwilling to control his assailants. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069, 1072 (9th Cir.2005) (indicating that failure to inform the government of an incident of persecution committed by a private actor undercuts the conclusion that the government is unwilling or unable to control the private actor’s attempts at…

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.