Bonilla v. Mukasey, No. 07-1813 (1st Cir.) 8/25/08CUDAHY, Torruella, Lipez
Bonilla and his wife fled Colombia due to threatening phone calls and letters they received from the FARC on account of their political activities with the Liberal Party in Colombia. Bonilla did have a fiver year resident stamp from Venezuela which allowed him to enter and exit the country for business but which had an expiation date. The First Circuit held that the IJ and BIA’s determined that a Venezuelan five-year resident stamp is an offer of permanent residency, lacked support in the record. The Court summarized the findings of sister circuits and concluded that other courts when faced with the similar situation of “ambiguous immigration documents from third countries” have remanded the case back for further clarification on the record. See Maharaj v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 961, 977 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc); Abdille v. Ashcroft, 242 F.3d 477, 490 (3rd Cir. 2001). The Court further held that while the BIA had stated that Bonilla had not established past persecution, the BIA had not really addressed if Bonilla had a well founded fear of future persecution.
First Circuit 
