U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2007

Avetisyan v. Gonzales

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 21, 2007 · Kleinfeld, Silverman, Smith

235 F. App'x 607

Counsel

John D. Friedman, Law Offices of John D. Friedman, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner., CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Susan R. Hershman, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, Civil & Tax Divisions, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Oil, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Samvel Avetisyan v. Eric H. Holder Jr. (9th Cir. 2011)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Samvel Avetisyan, a citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Where it is unclear whether the BIA conducted a de novo review, we look to the IJ’s decision as a guide. See Avetova-Elisseva v. INS, 213 F.3d 1192, 1197 (9th Cir. 2000). We review for substantial evidence, see Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding. Avetisyan’s omission from his asylum interview of the physical abuse that he claimed he suffered during his detention goes to the heart of his asylum claim. See Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 963 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, his asylum claim is denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.