FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 5 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARISA SETYAWATI WISNUBROTO; No. 08-73177
et al.,
Agency Nos. A098-148-877
Petitioners, A098-148-878
A098-148-879
v. A098-148-880
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
MEMORANDUM *
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 2, 2011 **
Before: RYMER, IKUTA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Marisa Setyawati Wisnubroto, and her family, natives and citizens of
Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals” (“BIA”) order
dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their
application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8
*
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).
U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Wakkary v.
Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We grant the petition for review, and
we remand.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that petitioners’
experiences, including the threatening phone calls they received, did not rise to the
level of persecution. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1059-60. However, in assessing
petitioners’ future fear, as ethnically Javanese Evangelical Christians, the BIA did
not have the benefit of our intervening decision in Tampubolon v. Holder, 610 F.3d
1056 (9th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we grant the petition for review and remand
for the BIA to consider petitioners’ 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).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 08-73177