Carlos Jose Gurdian, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 129 F.3d 125 (9th Cir. 1997)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 129 F.3d 125 (9th Cir. 1997) Submitted July 22, 1997. **Decided Nov. 6, 1997

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, No. A72-525-644.

Before HUG, Chief Judge, KOZINSKI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM* 

Petitioner Carlos Gurdian is a Nicaraguan citizen who remained in the United States beyond the time allowed by his visa. The Immigration and Naturalization Service subsequently commenced deportation proceedings. Gurdian conceded deportability. The Immigration Judge ("IJ") denied Gurdian's application for asylum and withholding of deportation and his request for voluntary departure. Gurdian appealed these denials to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"). Although it did not address Gurdian's request for voluntary departure, the BIA otherwise affirmed the denial. Gurdian petitions us pro se for review. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We grant the petition in part and deny it in part.

* The BIA rejected Gurdian's application because it concluded that he failed to present sufficient evidence of past persecution or evidence that would establish a well-founded fear of future persecution.

Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the BIA's determination is supported by substantial evidence. Although Gurdian testified to incidents of past persecution, he produced no corroborating evidence. The record before us does not compel a conclusion to the contrary. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 481.

II

Because Gurdian failed to satisfy the lower standard required to establish eligibility for asylum, his claim for withholding of deportation necessarily fails. Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 961 (9th Cir. 1996).

III

Gurdian appealed the IJ's denial of his request for voluntary departure. The INS concedes that the BIA erred when it concluded that Gurdian failed to do so. As such, we remand for the BIA to consider Gurdian's request for voluntary departure.

PETITION GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART.

 **

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. The government's request for oral argument is denied

 *

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.