Cassius Hatibie v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

FILED
MAY 06 2011
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CASSIUS HATIBIE, No. 08-73704
Petitioner, Agency No. A078-020-275
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 20, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Cassius Hatibie, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ 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”). We have jurisdiction under
*
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).
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d
1012, 1015 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.
The record does not compel the conclusion that Hatibie established changed
or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his untimely asylum application. See 8
C.F.R. § 1208.4(a)(4), (5). Accordingly, Hatibie’s asylum claim fails.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of withholding of removal
because Hatibie’s experiences in Indonesia, including one beating, did not
constitute past persecution, see Halim v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 975-76 (9th Cir.
2009), and Hatibie failed to establish a clear probability of persecution on account
of his religion if he returned to Indonesia, see Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179,
1184-85 (9th Cir. 2003). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of
withholding of removal because Hatibie failed to establish he could not reasonably
relocate within Indonesia. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(3).
Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief
because Hatibie failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured
upon return to Indonesia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1067-68 (9th
Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-73704