Abisuk Sinsaeng v. Loretta E. Lynch , 647 F. App'x 701 ( 2016 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 31 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ABISUK SINSAENG, No. 13-72420
Petitioner, Agency No. A037-571-413
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued November 21, 2014
Submitted February 2, 2015
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, CHRISTEN, Circuit Judge, and SEABRIGHT,**
District Judge.
Abisuk Sinsaeng, a native and citizen of Thailand, was convicted of
dissuading a victim or witness in violation of Cal. Penal Code § 136.1(b)(1). The
Immigration Judge ordered him removed to Thailand, finding his conviction to be
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable J. Michael Seabright, District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.
an aggravated felony because it is an offense relating to obstruction of justice
under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(S). Applying the interpretation of “obstruction of
justice” articulated in In re Valenzuela Gallardo, 25 I. & N. Dec. 838 (BIA 2012),
the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Sinsaeng’s appeal. Sinsaeng now
petitions for review.1
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). In light of our
decision in Valenzuela Gallardo v. Lynch, No. 12-72326, we remand to the Board
for either application of the agency interpretation announced in In re Espinoza
Gonzalez, 22 I. & N. Dec. 889 (BIA 1999), or consideration of a new construction
of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(S).
PETITION GRANTED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
1
The parties are familiar with the facts, so we do not recount them in
detail.
FILED
Sinsaeng v. Lynch, No. 13-72420 MAR 31 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
SEABRIGHT, District Judge, dissenting:
I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent from the majority
Opinion in Valenzuela Gallardo v. Lynch, No. 12-72326.