FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 01 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S . CO U RT OF AP PE A LS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JULIO ARRESCURRENAGA; et al., No. 07-70967
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A075-540-994
A075-540-995
v. A075-540-996
A075-540-997
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
MEMORANDUM *
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCMN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Julio Arrescurrenaga and Jacinta Malaver ('adult petitioners'), and their
children Carolina and Andrea, natives and citizens of Peru, petition for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals' ('BIA') order affirming the immigration
judge's decision denying their applications for asylum and withholding of removal.
*
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).
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. y 1252. We review de novo questions of law
and review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings. See
Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1028 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny in part and
grant in part the petition for review.
The BIA found that adult petitioners had failed to establish past persecution
because the attacµs they suffered were inherent risµs in their duties as police
officers. The record does not compel the conclusion that adult petitioners suffered
harm on account of their actual or imputed political opinion, or as members of a
particular social group consisting of police officers. See id. at 1029-30.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA's finding that adult petitioners did not
demonstrate an objective well-founded fear of future persecution based on their
status as former police officers. See INS v. Elias-Zacharias, 502 U.S. 478, 482-83
(1992); see also Chanco v. INS, 82 F.3d 298, 303 (9th Cir, 1996) (former military
officer did not meet burden of showing a liµelihood of being singled out for
persecution).
Jacinta, Andrea, and Carolina argued to the BIA that they suffered past
persecution and have a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of their
membership in the particular social group of their family. The BIA, however, did
not address their claims. Accordingly, we grant the petition with respect to
2 06-73675
Jacinta's, Andrea's, and Carolina's claims based on membership in the social
group of their family and remand for the BIA to address these claims in the first
instance. See Sagadyaµ v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005) ('the
BIA [is] not free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner'); see also INS v.
Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam). We also grant the petition and
remand as to Carolina's claim that she is eligible for humanitarian asylum relief
under 8 C.F.R. y 1208.13(b)(1)(iii)(B) due to her growth hormone deficiency
because the BIA also failed to address this claim. See Sagadyaµ, 405 F.3d at 1040;
see also Ventura, 537 U.S. at 16-18.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal.
3 06-73675
FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 02 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S . CO U RT OF AP PE A LS
JULIO ARRESCURRENAGA; et al., No. 07-70967
Petitioners, Agency Nos. A075-540-994
A075-540-995
v. A075-540-996
A075-540-997
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
ORDER
Respondent.
Before: ALARCMN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
We grant the government's unopposed motion for an extension of time and
have considered the government's response to the petition for rehearing filed on
January 25, 2011.
The petition for panel rehearing is granted and the memorandum disposition
filed on July 7, 2010, is withdrawn. A replacement memorandum disposition is
being filed concurrently with this order.
Any further petition for panel rehearing may be filed within 45 days of the
filing of this order.