From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nguyen Tuyen Hong v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 1, 2008
293 F. App'x 444 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 05-77170.

Submitted July 22, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed August 1, 2008.

Martin Roy Robles, Esq., Law Office of Martin Resendez Guajardo, P.C., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Mervyn Hamburg, Esq., Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency Nos. A77-427-195 to A77-427-197.

Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

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


Nguyen Tuyen Hong and his wife and son, all citizens of Vietnam, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention against Torture ("CAT"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition.

Even if their asylum application had been timely filed, substantial evidence supports the IJ's conclusion that petitioners failed to establish eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal, because they did not provide evidence indicating that they were or would be targeted on account of a protected ground. See id. at 1170-72.

Because we reach the merits of petitioners' asylum claim, we decline to consider petitioners' contention that their due process rights were violated by ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to the untimely filing of their asylum application.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ's denial of CAT relief because Tuyen Hong did not show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if returned to Vietnam. See Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Nguyen Tuyen Hong v. Mukasey

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 1, 2008
293 F. App'x 444 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Nguyen Tuyen Hong v. Mukasey

Case Details

Full title:NGUYEN TUYEN HONG; Le Yen Thi, et al., Petitioners, v. Michael B. MUKASEY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 1, 2008

Citations

293 F. App'x 444 (9th Cir. 2008)