Madhloom

Madhloom v. Mukasey

Good Law
285 F. App'x 407
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 9, 2008No. 05-75560California325 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Abdullah Ahmed Murshed Madhloom, a native and citizen of Yemen, petitions 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 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 .

We review for substantial evidence, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 & n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), and deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Madhloom failed to demonstrate changed circumstances that would excuse his untimely asylum application. See Fakhry v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1057, 1063 (9th Cir.2008). We therefore deny the petition as to the asylum claim.

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of withholding of removal. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 481 & n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 . Madhloom’s single detention by the Yemeni authorities, without harm, was not “so overwhelming so as to necessarily constitute persecution.” Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339-40 (9th Cir.1995). In addition, changed political conditions…

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.