FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 16 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AMARPREET SINGH VIRK, No. 08-72670
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-599-564
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 11, 2011 **
Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Amarpreet Singh Virk, a native and citizen of India, 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 relief 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. Lopez v.
Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 799, 805 (9th Cir. 2004). We grant the petition for review and
we remand.
In determining the government rebutted Virk’s presumption of a well-
founded fear of future persecution, the agency erred because it relied on a United
States State Department report that pre-dated Virk’s past persecution and because
it incorporated findings of fact this court rejected in Virk v. Gonzales, No. 04-
74691, 168 Fed. App’x 237 (9th Cir. 2006). Further, in determining the report
prepared by ENSAAF was entitled to little weight because ENSAAF had not been
shown to be objective, accurate, or reliable, the agency failed to acknowledge that
ENSAAF is cited to and relied upon in the 2006 U. S. State Department Report.
Accordingly, we grant the petition and remand to the agency on an open
record for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura,
537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 08-72670