FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUKARSONO, No. 08-70317
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-634-688
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010 **
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Lukarsono, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual
findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and we grant in
part and deny in part the petition for review.
In his opening brief, Lukarsono fails to challenge the agency’s dispositive
determination that his asylum claim was time-barred, and also does not raise any
substantive challenge to the agency’s denial of his CAT claim. See
Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not
specifically raised and argued are deemed waived).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of past persecution
because Lukarsono failed to show he was harmed by forces the government was
unable or unwilling to control. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069, 1072
(9th Cir. 2005).
Lukarsono argued to the BIA that he feared future persecution on account of
his Chinese ethnicity and Christian religion. The agency did not consider
Lukarsono’s application for withholding of removal under the disfavored group
analysis. In light of our recent decisions in Wakkary and Tampubolon v. Holder,
No. 06-70811, 2010 WL 2541610 at *5 (9th Cir. June 25, 2010), we remand for
the BIA to assess Lukarsono’s withholding of removal claim under the disfavored
2 08-70317
group analysis in the first instance. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067; see also INS v.
Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED in part; DENIED in part;
REMANDED.
3 08-70317