Kaur
Kaur v. Mukasey
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Baljit Kaur petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of her appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 1 We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Because the BIA “reviewed the IJ’s decision and incorporated portions of it as its own, we treat the incorporated parts of the IJ’s decision as the BIA’s.” Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2002). We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s determination that changed country conditions and the ability to relocate within India rebut the presumption that Kaur has a well-founded fear of persecution, see Marcu v. INS, 147 F.3d 1078, 1081-82 (9th Cir.1998), and we deny the petition.
The BIA relied on evidence that members of Akali Dal, the political group in which Kaur claims membership, are no longer persecuted. This individualized finding of changed country conditions rebuts Kaur’s specific grounds for her well-founded fear of future persecution. See Lopez v. Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 799, 805 (9th Cir.2004); Molinar-Estrada, 293 F.3d at 1096 .