The 1st Cir found that lack of physical harm was a "pertinent datum" which - while not dispositive - was properly considered by the Board. It also upheld the Board's PSG holding, finding that the mere fact that several family members were persecuted was not indicative that they were actually aiming at this particular family.
The 1st Cir overturned an IJ's finding that the Petitioner did not suffer past persecution where she was detained for three days and beaten till she lost consciousness; and found the IJ's dismissal of threats to be legally erroneous. "[W]e have never suggested that threats cannot constitute persecution. On the contrary, we have often acknowledged that credible threats can, depending on the circumstances, amount to persecution, especially when the assailant threatens the petitioner with death, in person, and with a weapon. See, e.g., López de Hincapie v. Gonzáles, 494 F.3d 213, 217 (1st Cir. 2007); Some v. Gonzáles, 183 F. App'x 4, 7 (1st Cir. 2006); Un, 415 F.3d at 210."
The 1st Cir held that the Petitioner's conclusory arguments, which only challenged one aspect of the adverse credibility determination, on a ground which was false, were so weak as to abandon the claim that the Board erred
The 1st Cir rejected the IJ's adverse credibility finding (where Petitioner had begun continued hearing by asking to clear up one misunderstanding); and found that past mistreatment was indeed persecution. But it upheld the withholding denial on the alternate basis that country conditions in Cambodia had improved.
The 1st Cir upheld the adverse credibility determination of an IJ in an Albanian asylum case. The majority upheld the IJ's demeanor-based adverse credibility finding, as well as an alternate ground based on purported inconsistencies with a document. Judge Cyr, dissenting, believes that the Board upheld only a part of the IJ's credibility decision, and that the IJ should have given the applicant a chance to explain, rather than waiting in ambush.
First Circuit 
