Vaid

Vaid v. Mukasey

Good Law
288 F. App'x 321
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 11, 2008No. 06-73634California1,997 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Navneet Vaid, a native and citizen of India, seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), which affirmed the decision of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Vaid’s *323 requests for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“Convention”). We deny the petition.

The BIA “adopted and affirmed” the rulings of the IJ that Vaid’s asylum application was time-barred, and that his testimony was incredible and therefore insufficient to support withholding of removal. The BIA “affirmed” the IJ’s rulings that, even if Vaid’s testimony were credible, changed country conditions rebutted any presumption of a well-founded fear of persecution, and that Vaid had failed to establish eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture. All of these rulings by the BIA were accompanied by a citation to Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N. Dec. 872, 874 (BIA 1994), indicating that the BIA’s “conclusions are the same as those articulated by the IJ.” Moreno-Morante v. Gonzales, 490 F.3d 1172, 1174 (9th Cir. 2007). Thus, we review the IJ’s decision as if it were that of the BIA. Id.

1. Asylum

We ordinarily lack…

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.