Rusli v. Gonzales

First Circuit

Rusli v. Gonzales

282 F. App'x 1

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedJune 27, 2008

Docket06-1941

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 282 F. App'x 1 (Rusli v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rusli v. Gonzales, 282 F. App'x 1 (1st Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Lisa Rusli and her husband, Hendra Lay, are citizens of Indonesia and sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) based upon Rush’s 1 experiences as a Christian of Chinese ancestry in Indonesia. The immigration judge denied relief and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Petitioners then filed a petition for review, which we now summarily deny. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27(c).

The brief filed by petitioners’ counsel, Yan Wang, is a “cut and paste” affair that appears to present the facts of another case — notably for a person of a different gender than Rush, who had different experiences, in different years, and appeared before a different immigration judge. This substantive failure to comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 alone justifies dismissal. See generally Ramírez v. Debs-Elías, 407 F.3d 444, 446 n. 1 (1st Cir.2005). Further, the brief, by definition, offers no developed argument directed to petitioners’ claims, with the necessary consequence that the claims are waived. See Jiang v. Gonzales, 474 F.3d 25, 32 (1st Cir.2007) (citing United, States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.1990)). Moreover, after reviewing the record we conclude that Rush’s claims fall well short of establishing the requisite eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT. See, e.g., Attia v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 21, 24 (1st Cir.2007); Susanto v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 57, 59-61 (1st Cir.2006).

It is so ordered.

1

. Lay's request for relief is derivative of his spouse's.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Lisa Rusli and her husband, Hendra Lay, are citizens of Indonesia and sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) based upon Rush’s 1 experiences as a Christian of Chinese ancestry in Indonesia. The immigration judge denied relief and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Petitioners then filed a petition for review, which we now summarily deny. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27(c).

The brief filed by petitioners’ counsel, Yan Wang, is a “cut and paste” affair that appears to present the facts of another case — notably for a person of a different gender than Rush, who had different experiences, in different years, and appeared before a different immigration judge. This substantive failure to comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28 alone justifies dismissal. See generally Ramírez v. Debs-Elías, 407 F.3d 444, 446 n. 1 (1st Cir.2005). Further, the brief, by definition, offers no developed argument directed to petitioners’ claims, with the necessary consequence that the claims are waived. See Jiang v. Gonzales, 474 F.3d 25, 32 (1st Cir.2007) (citing United, States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.1990)). Moreover, after reviewing the record we conclude that Rush’s claims fall well short of establishing the requisite eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the CAT. See, e.g., Attia v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 21, 24 (1st Cir.2007); Susanto v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 57, 59-61 (1st Cir.2006).

It is so ordered.

1

. Lay's request for relief is derivative of his spouse's.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 F. App'x 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rusli-v-gonzales-ca1-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack