FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 26 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MATIUR RAHMAN, No. 15-71564
Petitioner, Agency No. A206-911-154
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Matiur Rahman, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum
and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
*
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).
review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. See Ren v. Holder,
648 F.3d 1079, 1083 (9th Cir. 2011). We grant the petition for review and remand.
The BIA found that Rahman did not challenge the IJ’s finding that he could
internally relocate. The record does not support the BIA’s conclusion where
Rahman, in his pro se brief to the BIA, argued that he did not think the police
would protect him anywhere he went in Bangladesh. Thus, we grant the petition
for review as to Rahman’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, and remand
for the BIA to address the IJ’s internal relocation finding in the first instance. See
INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 (2002) (per curiam).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 15-71564