Nada

Nada v. Mukasey

Good Law
268 F. App'x 636
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 5, 2008No. 05-75306California862 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Emil Nada, a citizen and native of Egypt, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming and adopting the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and grant the petition in part and remand.

We note at the outset that because the IJ found Nada credible, his testimony must be accepted as true. Hartooni v. INS, 21 F.3d 386, 342 (9th Cir.1994). 1 Furthermore, although certainly inartful, Nada’s briefs to this court and the BIA— along with the notice of appeal to the BIA — did portray his ultimate objective of challenging the IJ’s finding that Nada was not subjected to past persecution. See Mamouzian v. Ashcroft, 390 F.3d 1129, 1136 (9th Cir.2004); Ladha v. INS, 215 F.3d 889, 903 (9th Cir.2000) (finding issue raised in the notice of appeal but not in the briefs reviewable because “the notice of appeal is of great importance in raising claims before the BIA”).

Because Nada did not waive the issue, the question becomes whether a reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to…

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.