Kvinikadze

Kvinikadze v. Mukasey

Good Law
277 F. App'x 698
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 6, 2008No. 04-74070California342 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mamuka Kvinikadze, a native and citizen of Georgia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s and BIA’s denial of petitioner’s claims on the basis of an adverse credibility finding. Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992 (9th Cir. 2003). We grant the petition in part, deny the petition in part, and dismiss the petition in part.

Substantial evidence does not support the IJ’s and BIA’s adverse credibility determination. Kvinikadze plausibly and reasonably explained why he did not include two details from his asylum application — that he was cut during a beating by police and that he took a two-week trip. See Bandari v. INS, 227 F.3d 1160, 1166-67 (9th Cir.2000) (reversing where IJ based adverse credibility determination on the omission of a detail of petitioner’s persecution from an asylum application).

Kvinikadze’s contention that the IJ’s reliance on the asylum…

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.