Dotulung v. Mukasey
This text of 316 F. App'x 546 (Dotulung v. Mukasey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Lefina Maria Dotulung and her hus[547]*547band, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Dhital v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 1044, 1050 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that extraordinary or changed circumstances excused the untimely filing of petitioners’ asylum application. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.4(a)(4)(5); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 657-58 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam). As a result, the petitioners are not eligible for asylum.
We do not consider withholding of removal or CAT protection because the petitioners concede in their opening brief that they are not eligible for these grounds of relief.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
316 F. App'x 546, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dotulung-v-mukasey-ca9-2008.