| 3d Cir rejects pattern and practice claim for Indonesian Christians |
|
|
| Wednesday, 20 August 2008 | |||||
|
Wong v. Mukasey (3d Cir. 8/20/08) CHAGARES Aldisert Fuentes The CtApp found that the Board's decision, while brief, provided enough detail to permit judicial review. It upheld the Board's analysis in finding a lack of a "pattern and practice" of persecution of Indonesian Christians, finding Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922 (9th Cir. 2004), and Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182 (5th Cir. 2004) to be based on outdated country conditions docs. Fact that her husband's asylum claim was approved could have been relevant (citing Cham v. Att’y Gen., 445 F.3d 683, 693 (3d Cir. 2006)), but "Wong has not provided any details as to her husband’s claim and we therefore cannot assess its similarity or relevance to her claim." I-730 pendency was irrelevant to the case. CtApp also suggested that Govt's attempts to protect Christians might be relevant to pattern and practice claim. Interesting, the CtApp cited recent country conditions reports, but did not take judicial notice of them:
Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.12 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved. |
|||||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|






