Esfandiar Nikbakhsh Tali v. Holder , 381 F. App'x 648 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                                                                               FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                                JUN 01 2010
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ESFANDIAR NIKBAKHSH TALI,                        No. 05-72621
    Petitioner,                        A020-039-482
    v.
    ERIC H. HOLDER,                                  MEMORANDUM *
    Respondent.
    Appeal from the Board of Immigration Appeals
    Argued and Submitted May 14, 2010,
    San Francisco, California
    Before: W. FLETCHER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and PRO,** District
    Judge.
    Plaintiff-Appellant Esfandiar Nikbakhsh Tali (“Tali”), a native and citizen of
    Iran, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
    affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision to deny Tali withholding of
    removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act and deferral of removal under
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The Honorable Philip M. Pro, United States District Judge for the
    District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
    the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    , 2242 and we deny the petition for review.
    Because the BIA affirmed the IJ and dismissed Tali’s appeal without any
    additional reasoning, the Court reviews the IJ’s decision as if it were the final
    agency action. See Nuru v. Gonzales, 
    404 F.3d 1207
    , 1215 (9th Cir. 2005). On the
    record before us, we cannot say that the IJ relied on improper evidence in
    determining that Tali was convicted of a “particularly serious” crime and thus is
    ineligible for withholding of removal. See Anaya-Ortiz v. Holder, 
    594 F.3d 673
    ,
    677 (9th Cir. 2010).
    The IJ also did not err in denying Tali deferral of removal under CAT.
    Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denial of CAT relief because Tali failed to
    establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured if he is returned to Iran.
    See Herrera v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 
    571 F.3d 881
    , 885 (9th Cir.
    2009); Huang v. Ashcroft, 
    390 F.3d 1118
    , 1122 (9th Cir. 2004).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-72621

Citation Numbers: 381 F. App'x 648

Judges: Fletcher, Smith

Filed Date: 6/1/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024