Stella Moudoyan v. Loretta E. Lynch

641 F. App'x 721

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: February 23, 2016
• Docket: 13-71410
• Status: Unpublished

Opinions

MEMORANDUM

**

Stella Moudoyan, a citizen of Italy, files a petition challenging an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal of an immigration judge’s order that denied her and her children’s application for asylum. As the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recount them here. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the petition and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.

The BIA concluded that Moudoyan was not entitled to relief because: (1) she failed to establish past persecution; (2) she did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution; and (3) she failed to demonstrate that she could not reasonably relocate within Italy. As to the first issue, the BIA concluded that the “applicant ha[d] not shown that any threats, verbal or implied, were menacing enough to establish past persecution, even when all of the threats [were] considered cumulatively.” The BIA’s order, however, does not explain how it reached its conclusion. “[F]or the court to exercise our limited authority, there must be a reasoned explanation by the BIA of the basis for its decision.” Franco-Rosendo v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 965, 966 (9th Cir.2006). Therefore, we remand this case so the BIA can explain its ruling and so our court can review it.¹ See, e.g., Arredondo v. Holder, 623 F.3d 1317, 1320 (9th Cir.2010) (“[W]e must remand the cause to the BIA to clarify the statutory grounds upon which it relied in denying further review.”); Su Hwa She v. Holder, 629 F.3d 958, 963-64 (9th Cir.2010) (“Rather than countenance a decision that leaves us to speculate based on an incomplete analysis, we remand the case to the BIA for clarification.”).

GRANTED and REMANDED.

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

1 . We express no view as to the merits of Moudoyan’s argument that the BIA erred in concluding that she did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution or that she cannot reasonably'relocate within Italy,