Haddadin

MEMORANDUM **

Ayman Haddadin, a citizen of Jordan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his motion to reopen. We grant the petition.

The IJ explained his denial on reconsideration of Haddadin’s motion to reopen with one sentence: “The evidence offered by respondent does not establish that country conditions in Jordan have changed sufficiently or at all so as to place the alien in danger of religious persecution — especially since his church is one registered with and not officially hounded by the Jordanian government.” On the form denying the motion, he also checked a box indicating that Haddadin had failed to make a prima facie case for the underlying relief, and another stating that the petitioner had failed to convince the IJ to exercise his discretion in granting the motion to reopen.

*597 This explanation is inadequate. Because it is so very brief, it does not explain the IJ’s reasoning in a way conducive to judicial review. See Movsisian v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1095, 1098 (9th Cir.2005). The brevity is of particular concern in this case because, insofar as we can discern the IJ’s…