§
In re M-M-A.

26 Cited authorities

  1. INS v. Bagamasbad

    429 U.S. 24 (1976)   Cited 831 times
    Holding no requirement "to arrive at purely advisory findings and conclusions as to statutory eligibility" for immigration relief when application fails for other reasons

  2. Cole v. Holder

    659 F.3d 762 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 361 times
    Holding that "misstating the record and failing to mention highly probative or potentially dispositive evidence" indicates that the agency failed to consider all the evidence

  3. Sagaydak v. Gonzales

    405 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 236 times
    Holding that the BIA is not free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner

  4. Vitug v. Holder

    723 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2013)   Cited 148 times
    Holding that five beatings and robberies, "two of [which] were severe," did not qualify as torture

  5. Ali v. Ashcroft

    394 F.3d 780 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 111 times
    Holding that the attackers' statements while they were raping the victim — that the victim was getting what she deserved because she was a Midgan and that Midgans are traitors — "themselves evidence that [the attackers] were motivated, at least in part, by [petitioner's] clan status and political opinion, and not solely by criminal opportunism"

  6. Liu v. Holder

    640 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 83 times
    Holding that an inconsistent statement made during airport interview, together with improbable and inadequate explanations for two other discrepancies, supported an adverse credibility determination

  7. Ahir v. Mukasey

    527 F.3d 912 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 76 times
    Holding that inconsistencies between an alien's application and testimony and an inability to explain those inconsistencies establishes frivolousness by a preponderance of the evidence

  8. Khadka v. Holder

    618 F.3d 996 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 53 times
    Holding that expert testimony combined with a petitioner's failure to offer a plausible explanation for how he obtained a fraudulent newspaper article was sufficient to support an adverse credibility determination, even where the IJ did not make a specific finding that the petitioner knew the article was not genuine

  9. Dawson v. Garland

    998 F.3d 876 (9th Cir. 2021)   Cited 32 times
    In Dawson, the majority affirmed the denial of CAT relief where the petitioner suffered past torture at the hands of her intimate partner before obtaining a protective order that stopped the torture because "[t]he inference that future torture is likely to recur breaks down where ‘circumstances or conditions have changed significantly, not just in general, but with respect to the particular individual.’ "

  10. Fernandes v. Holder

    619 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 48 times
    Finding no error in a BIA decision remanding to an IJ “to allow the DHS an opportunity to establish that since the time the persecution occurred conditions in the respondent's country have changed” and for “further proceeding consistent with the foregoing opinion.”

  11. Section 1158 - Asylum

    8 U.S.C. § 1158   Cited 10,675 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding a "pattern or practice" of persecution requires it be "systemic, pervasive, or organized"

  12. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,912 times   69 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

  13. Section 1255 - Adjustment of status of nonimmigrant to that of person admitted for permanent residence

    8 U.S.C. § 1255   Cited 2,896 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Listing classes of nonimmigrants, such as students and tourists

  14. Section 1208.13 - Establishing asylum eligibility

    8 C.F.R. § 1208.13   Cited 412 times
    Providing that an applicant will be considered for relief under CAT "if the applicant requests such consideration or if the evidence presented by the alien indicates that the alien may be tortured in the country of removal"

  15. Section 1240.8 - Burdens of proof in removal proceedings

    8 C.F.R. § 1240.8   Cited 312 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Applying "clearly and beyond doubt" burden to "proceedings commenced upon a respondent's arrival" or "[a]liens present in the United States without being admitted"

  16. Section 1208.20 - Determining if an asylum application is frivolous

    8 C.F.R. § 1208.20   Cited 127 times
    Defining a “frivolous” application as “deliberately fabricated”

  17. Section 208.20 - Determining if an asylum application is frivolous

    8 C.F.R. § 208.20   Cited 62 times
    Stating that the frivolous application penalty "shall not preclude the alien from seeking withholding of removal"

  18. Section 1208.3 - Form of application

    8 C.F.R. § 1208.3   Cited 22 times

    (a) (1) Except for applicants described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, an asylum applicant must file Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, together with any additional supporting evidence in accordance with the instructions on the form. The applicant's spouse and children shall be listed on the application and may be included in the request for asylum if they are in the United States. One additional copy of the principal applicant's Form I-589 must be submitted

  19. Section 1208.14 - Approval, denial, referral, or dismissal of application

    8 C.F.R. § 1208.14   Cited 4 times

    (a)By an immigration judge. Unless otherwise prohibited in § 1208.13(c) , an immigration judge may grant or deny asylum in the exercise of discretion to an applicant who qualifies as a refugee under section 101(a)(42) of the Act. In no case shall an immigration judge grant asylum without compliance with the requirements of § 1003.47 concerning identity, law enforcement, or security investigations or examinations. (b)Approval by an asylum officer. In any case within the jurisdiction of USCIS, unless