Touch v. Holder (June 4, 2009)

Torruella, LIPEZ, Howard

The Court denied the PFR finding that substantial evidence supported the BIA finding of no past or future persecution.  Additionally, the Court found that as the CAT argument was not developed in BIA briefing, it was deemed waived.

Read Opinion Here...

Da Silva Neves v. Holder (June 4, 2009)

Lynch, Torruella, Ebel

 Once again the Court held that it has no jurisdiction to review denials of sua sponte MTRs.

Read Opinion Here... 

Burbiene v. Holder (June 1, 2009)

Lynch, Selya, LIPEZ

Petitioner applied for asylum based on her fear that she and her daughter would be forced into prostitution (sex trafficking) if returned to Lithuania.  The IJ and BIA found that she failed to establish future persecution on account of a protected group and that the feared activity was criminal rather than a governmental activity.  Furthermore, they found that the record did not support a finding that Lithuania was unwilling or unable  human sex trafficking.  The Court agreed with the BIA that the facts did not establish a nexus between the claimed fear and the government of Lithuania and that the BIA conclusion that well founded fear had not been established was supported by substantial evidence in the record.  

 Read Opinion Here...

Peralta v. Holder (May 28, 2009)

Howard, SELYA, Hansen

Denial of sua sponte motion to reopen by the BIA is beyond the Court's authority to review.

Read Opinion Here...