748 Fed.Appx. 743 (9th Cir. 2018), 14-72341, Chajon v. Sessions
|Citation:||748 Fed.Appx. 743|
|Party Name:||Jario CHAJON, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.|
|Attorney:||Thomas Damien Pamilla, Attorney, Law Offices of Thomas D. Pamilla, APC, Fremont, CA, Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Attorney, Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner Matthew Allan Spurlock, Attorney, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ - U....|
|Judge Panel:||Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO , District Judge.|
|Case Date:||September 05, 2018|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
Argued and Submitted August 13, 2018 San Francisco, California
Governing the citation to unpublished opinions please refer to federal rules of appellate procedure rule 32.1. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.
Thomas Damien Pamilla, Attorney, Law Offices of Thomas D. Pamilla, APC, Fremont, CA, Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Attorney, Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner
Matthew Allan Spurlock, Attorney, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Agency No. A XXX-XX0-912
Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO[*], District Judge.
Petitioner Jario Chajon ("Chajon"), a native and citizen of Guatemala, appeals the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") of his applications for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). Reviewing both determinations "under the deferential substantial evidence standard," see Ai Jun Zhi v. Holder, 751 F.3d 1088, 1091 (9th Cir. 2014), we deny his petitions for withholding of removal and CAT relief. However, in light of the Supreme Courts recent decision in Pereira v. Sessions, __ U.S. __, 138 S.Ct. 2105, 201 L.Ed.2d 433 (2018), we remand for the BIA to consider whether Chajon is eligible for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, we need not recount them here.
1. Chajon challenges the BIAs adverse credibility determination solely on the ground that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance. However, we generally "require an...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP