Solomon Weldegebriel v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 548 F. App'x 423 ( 2013 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 06 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SOLOMON GHEZEHEY No. 10-71081
WELDEGEBRIEL,
Agency No. A089-649-816
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 3, 2013**
San Francisco, California
Before: TROTT, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Solomon Ghezehey Weldegebriel, a citizen of Eritrea, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal of an
*
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).
immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of
removal. We deny the petition for review.
Weldegebriel contends that we should review de novo the BIA’s
determination that Weldegebriel failed to establish that the mistreatment he
experienced in Eritrea after his unsuccessful escape from military service was on
account of an imputed political opinion. We do not reach this argument because,
even reviewing the BIA’s determination de novo, we conclude that Weldegebriel
failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a
political opinion.
To establish eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal, an applicant
must demonstrate that he has suffered past persecution or has a well-founded fear
of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a
particular group, or political opinion. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1185
(9th Cir. 2006). “[P]unishment for evasion of military duty generally does not
constitute persecution on account of a protected ground.” Movsisian v. Ashcroft,
395 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2005). Weldegebriel’s evidence that the Eritrean
government required him to sign a statement that he had betrayed his country
because he had evaded military service is insufficient to bring his case outside of
this general rule.
2
The evidence in the record, whether viewed de novo or for substantial
evidence, fails to establish that the mistreatment Weldegebriel suffered in Eritrea
was on account of an imputed political opinion or that he has a well-founded fear
of future persecution in Eritrea on account of an imputed political opinion.
Weldegebriel’s petition for review of his application for asylum and withholding of
removal is denied.
DENIED.
3