Dinssa v. Attorney General of United States, 021014 FED3, 13-1838

Docket Nº:13-1838
Opinion Judge:FUENTES, Circuit Judge
Party Name:TAKELE EDOSSA DINSSA Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Respondent
Judge Panel:Before: FUENTES, FISHER, Circuit Judges, and JONES, District Judge.
Case Date:February 10, 2014
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

TAKELE EDOSSA DINSSA Petitioner

v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Respondent

No. 13-1838

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

February 10, 2014

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) January 21, 2014

On Petition for Review of a Final Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A097-921-001) Immigration Judge: Honorable Rosalind K. Malloy

Before: FUENTES, FISHER, Circuit Judges, and JONES, District Judge. 1

OPINION

FUENTES, Circuit Judge

Takele Dinssa petitions for review of a final order of removal issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"), which affirmed the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial of his applications for asylum and withholding of removal. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

I.

Dinssa, an ethnic Oromo and citizen of Ethiopia, was admitted to the United States on a nonimmigrant visa and was later issued a Notice to Appear in Immigration Court for overstaying his visa. Dinssa conceded removability, but sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the regulations implementing the United States' obligations under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a), 1231(b)(3); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.16(c), 1208.17(a).

Based on documentary and testimonial evidence regarding the Oromo Liberation Front ("OLF") and Dinssa's admitted support for that group, the IJ found that Dinssa was statutorily ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal due to the material support to a terrorist organization bar. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)(dd). In pertinent part, the IJ found that Dinssa belonged to a group of businessmen that "contribut[es] money to cover medical and other expenses of OLF cadres" and that the "evidence indicates that [Dinssa] financially supported the OLF." AR 172. Additionally, while Dinssa testified on direct examination that "he would never knowingly give money to someone who would use it for violence, " he testified on cross examination that "he knew that the OLF has an army wing of fighters." AR 172. Accordingly, the IJ determined that Dinssa had not set forth clear and convincing evidence that the statutory "knowledge exception" to the material support bar applied. While the IJ found Dinssa to be ineligible for asylum and withholding of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP