FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YERVAND MINASYAN, No. 07-73839
Petitioner, Agency No. A077-837-124
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Yervand Minasyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum and withholding
of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for
*
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).
substantial evidence. Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 933 (9th Cir. 2000). We grant the
petition for review and remand.
Minasyan credibly testified that he was arrested, beaten, and questioned
about his faith by police after showing a religious film to congregation members at
a movie theater. Minasyan also testified that he was detained, interrogated and
beaten by police and told to forget about his faith after gathering with other
congregation members in a friend’s home to sing hymns. As well, Minasyan was
arrested and beaten by police at his father’s house while they were praying, reading
the bible, and praising God.
Substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s finding that Minasyan
failed to establish past persecution because his credible testimony, see Kataria v.
INS, 232 F.3d 1107, 1114 (9th Cir. 2000), established the police arrested and beat
him three times, at least in part, on account of his religion. See Ahmed v. Keisler,
504 F.3d 1183, 1194 (9th Cir. 2007); Mihalev v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 722, 727-30
(9th Cir. 2004).
Minasyan is therefore entitled to a presumption that he holds a well-founded
fear of persecution. See Ladha v. INS, 215 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, we remand for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
2 07-73839
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
3 07-73839