Kalam Ullah v. William Barr

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 7 2020

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

KALAM ULLAH, AKA Mahammed No. 16-73874 Sayedul Hoq, AKA Mohammad Hoq, AKA Mohammed Hoq, Agency No. A075-653-618

Petitioner,

ORDER

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and WARDLAW and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

The memorandum disposition filed on February 6, 2020, and appearing at 793 F. App’x 551, is amended as follows:

At pages 552–53, replace <Because Petitioner did not provide independent corroborating evidence, and his claims turned on his own testimony, the IJ properly determined that Petitioner was not entitled to withholding of removal or protection under the CAT.> with <Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s and IJ’s conclusion that the documentary evidence submitted by Petitioner was insufficient to establish his claims. Accordingly, the agency properly concluded that Petitioner was not entitled to withholding of removal or protection under the CAT.>

With this amendment, the panel has unanimously voted to deny Petitioner’s petition for rehearing. The petition for rehearing is DENIED. No further petitions shall be entertained.