Melikyan v. Holder

Ninth Circuit

Melikyan v. Holder

320 F. App'x 662

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 26, 2009

DocketNo. 05-75353

StatusPublished

This text of 320 F. App'x 662 (Melikyan v. Holder) 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.

Bluebook

Melikyan v. Holder, 320 F. App'x 662 (9th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

[663]*663MEMORANDUM

**

Levon Melikyan, a native of the former Soviet Union and citizen of Russia, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming 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, 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.

The government’s expert testimony and investigation reports from the United States embassy in Moscow provide substantial evidence to support the IJ’s finding that Melikyan submitted false documents. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir.2004). Because the genuineness of these documents went to the heart of Melikyan’s asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. See id. In the absence of credible evidence, Melikyan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Because Melikyan’s CAT claim is based on the same evidence the IJ found not credible, and he points to no other evidence to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured if he returns to Russia, his CAT claim fails. See id. at 1157.

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

[663]*663MEMORANDUM

**

Levon Melikyan, a native of the former Soviet Union and citizen of Russia, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming 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, 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.

The government’s expert testimony and investigation reports from the United States embassy in Moscow provide substantial evidence to support the IJ’s finding that Melikyan submitted false documents. See Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741, 745 (9th Cir.2004). Because the genuineness of these documents went to the heart of Melikyan’s asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. See id. In the absence of credible evidence, Melikyan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Because Melikyan’s CAT claim is based on the same evidence the IJ found not credible, and he points to no other evidence to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured if he returns to Russia, his CAT claim fails. See id. at 1157.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

320 F. App'x 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melikyan-v-holder-ca9-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack