Mersha

MEMORANDUM ***

Brook Mersha, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order reversing an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order granting Mersha asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir.2006), and we grant the petition in part, deny in part, and remand.

The IJ granted asylum based in part on Mersha’s imputed political opinion. The BIA reversed, explaining that Mersha did not claim he had in the past or would, in the future, participate in political activities. This was error because the imputed political opinion analysis focuses on “the political views the persecutor rightly or in error attributes to his victims,” not the person’s actual political views. See Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1489 (9th Cir.1997); see also Kumar v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1043, 1054 (9th Cir.2006) (“The fundamental fact relied upon by the IJ in ruling that [petitioner] had failed to establish a nexus between persecution and a protected ground—that [petitioner] was not in fact a member of a terrorist organization—is irrelevant to the imputed political…