U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2017

Araksi Tokramadzhyan v. Jefferson Sessions

Araksi Tokramadzhyan v. Jefferson Sessions
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided October 26, 2017 · McKeown, Watford, Friedland
699 F. App'x 728

Araksi Tokramadzhyan v. Jefferson Sessions

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Araksi Seropovna Tokramadzhyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that she did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture and thus is not entitled to relief from her reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. See Martinez v. Sessions, 873 F.3d 655, 2017 WL 4552543 (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2017). We review for substantial evidence the IJ’s factual findings, Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Tokramadzhyan failed to establish a reasonable possibility of future persecution in Armenia on account of a protected ground. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1185 (9th Cir. 2003) (to qualify for withholding of removal, a petitioner must show that it is more probable than not that she would suffer future persecution); see also Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”).

Substantial evidence also supports the conclusion" that Tokramadzhyan failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Armenian government. See Andrade-Garcia, 828 F.3d at 836-37.

The government’s unopposed motion to supplement the administrative record (Docket Entry No. 14) is granted.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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