FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 13 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LUCAS BUDIONO, a.k.a. Lu Han Hong, No. 08-72223
a.k.a. Budiono Lucas,
Agency No. A075-660-448
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2011 **
Before: B. FLETCHER, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Lucas Budiono, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ 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 jurisdiction
*
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).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and review for
substantial evidence factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056
(9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we
remand.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Budiono failed to establish it is more likely than not that he will be tortured in
Indonesia by or with the acquiescence of a public official or other individual acting
in an official capacity. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1068.
Further, the record does not compel the conclusion that Budiono experienced
harms in Indonesia that rise to the level of past persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft,
319 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003); Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1059-60. However, in
analyzing Budiono’s fear of future persecution, the agency did not apply the
disfavored group analysis set forth in Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 927-29 (9th
Cir. 2004). In light of this and our intervening decisions in Tampubolon v. Holder,
610 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2010), and Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049 (9th
Cir. 2009), we remand for the agency to assess Budiono’s asylum and withholding
of removal claims under the disfavored group analysis in the first instance. See
INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
2 08-72223
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
3 08-72223