FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 16 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VARDANUSH GRIGORYAN, No. 12-71734
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-528-308
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 6, 2015**
Pasadena, California
Before: FARRIS, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Vardanush Grigoryan petitions for review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ decision (1) denying her application for asylum, (2) denying her request
for withholding of removal, (3) denying her request for relief pursuant to the
*
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).
United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and (4) ordering her
removed to Armenia, her country of origin.
Because the parties are familiar with the facts and circumstances of this case,
we repeat them only as necessary to explain our decision.
Substantial evidence supports the immigration judge’s determination --
affirmed by the BIA -- that any adversity suffered by Mrs. Grigoryan as a
whistleblower was not the result of her political opinion. Furthermore, the adverse
consequences she did endure did not amount to persecution, either singly or in
combination.
Moreover, even if Grigoryan did establish cognizable persecution, the
government rebutted the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution.
Grigoryan’s husband lives in Armenia and works as a police officer in the
government agency where her problems started. The IJ said the following about
her alleged fear of harm should she be required to return:
It is simply unbelievable for this Court to think that
government officials would somehow be targeting the
Respondent or even Respondent’s husband, . . . The
Court finds this aspect of Respondent’s testimony
incredible, and unbelievable, and implausible.
The record supports this observation.
-2-
Finally, the record amply validates the BIA’s determination that relevant
“conditions in Armenia have fundamentally changed since the respondent’s
departure in 2003,” changes that are sufficient to rebut Grigoryan’s alleged fear of
future persecution or harm. Accordingly, her application for asylum and her
requests for withholding of removal and relief pursuant to CAT all fail.
PETITION DENIED.
-3-