Thiara v. Gonzales

Ninth Circuit

Thiara v. Gonzales

128 F. App'x 669

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 13, 2005

DocketNo. 03-72659

StatusPublished

This text of 128 F. App'x 669 (Thiara v. Gonzales) 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

Thiara v. Gonzales, 128 F. App'x 669 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

***

Amarjeet Thiara, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an Immigration Judge’s denial of his request for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s decision on whether the petitioner has established eligibility for asylum. See Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1119 (9th Cir.2004). We grant the petition and remand for further proceedings.

Because the BIA did not make an explicit adverse credibility determination in this case, we accept petitioner’s testimony as true. See Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 652 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000). Assuming Thiara’s testimony is true, the record shows that he was persecuted, at least in part, on account of an imputed political opinion. See id. at 659 & n. 18; Singh v. Ilchert, 63 F.3d 1501, 1509 (9th Cir.1995).

We therefore grant the petition and remand this case for further proceedings on the merits of Thiara’s asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

MEMORANDUM

***

Amarjeet Thiara, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an Immigration Judge’s denial of his request for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s decision on whether the petitioner has established eligibility for asylum. See Hasan v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 1114, 1119 (9th Cir.2004). We grant the petition and remand for further proceedings.

Because the BIA did not make an explicit adverse credibility determination in this case, we accept petitioner’s testimony as true. See Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 652 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000). Assuming Thiara’s testimony is true, the record shows that he was persecuted, at least in part, on account of an imputed political opinion. See id. at 659 & n. 18; Singh v. Ilchert, 63 F.3d 1501, 1509 (9th Cir.1995).

We therefore grant the petition and remand this case for further proceedings on the merits of Thiara’s asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 F. App'x 669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thiara-v-gonzales-ca9-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack