Huliselian v. Holder ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             JAN 21 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    YODI HILCO BALTI HULISELIAN,                      No. 07-71878
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A095-634-524
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted January 10, 2011 **
    Before:        BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    Yodi Hilco Balti Huliselian, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
    from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
    withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review factual findings for
    substantial evidence, Wakkary v. Holder, 
    558 F.3d 1049
    , 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and
    we deny the petition for review.
    The BIA denied Huliselian’s asylum claim as time-barred. Huliselian does
    not challenge this finding in his opening brief.
    Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Huliselian failed
    to demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be persecuted based on the harms
    inflicted upon his uncles. See Arriaga-Barrientos v. INS, 
    937 F.2d 411
    , 414 (9th
    Cir. 1991) (requiring “pattern of persecution closely tied to the petitioner” where
    violence against family members is basis of claim). Accordingly, Huliselian’s
    withholding of removal claim fails.
    Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of Huliselian’s CAT
    claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured
    if returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 
    558 F.3d at 1068
    .
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                   07-71878
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-71878

Judges: Beezer, Tallman, Callahan

Filed Date: 1/21/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024