Senik Soghomonyan v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           DEC 2 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    SENIK SOGHOMONYAN,                               No. 11-73350
    Petitioner,                       Agency No. A097-367-594
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted November 18, 2014**
    Before:        LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    Senik Soghomonyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of
    the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from the
    immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding
    of removal. We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review for
    *
    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).
    substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings and de novo questions of law.
    Mendoza-Pablo v. Holder, 
    667 F.3d 1308
    , 1312 (9th Cir. 2012). We deny the
    petition for review.
    We reject Soghomonyan’s contention that the agency erred in not
    considering his eligibility for humanitarian asylum, because he did not raise the
    claim to the agency.
    Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that, even if
    Soghomonyan was credible and established past persecution, the government
    rebutted his presumption of future fear. 
    8 C.F.R. § 1208.13
    (b)(ii); see Kumar v.
    INS, 
    204 F.3d 931
    , 934 (9th Cir. 2000). We reject Soghomonyan’s contention that
    the BIA improperly placed the burden of rebutting the presumption of future fear.
    Thus, Soghomonyan’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                   11-73350
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-73350

Judges: Leavy, Fisher, Smith

Filed Date: 12/2/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024