Rusli, et al v. Gonzales, No. 06-1941 (1st Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 06-1941 LISA RUSLI, HENDRA LAY, Petitioners, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY,* United States Attorney General, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS Before Lipez, Circuit Judge, Tashima,** Senior Circuit Judge, and Howard, Circuit Judge. Yan Wang on brief for petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Michelle G. Latour, Assistant Director and Jessica E. Sherman, Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, on brief for respondent. June 27, 2008 * Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2), Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey has been substituted for former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. ** Of the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation. Per curiam. Lisa Rusli and her husband, Hendra Lay, are citizens of Indonesia and sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) based upon Rusli's1 experiences as a Christian of Chinese ancestry in Indonesia. The immigration judge denied relief and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Petitioners then filed a petition for review, which we now summarily deny. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27(c). The brief filed by petitioners' counsel, Yan Wang, is a "cut and paste" affair that appears to present the facts of another case -- notably for a person of a different gender than Rusli, who had different experiences, in different years, and appeared before a different immigration judge. with Federal dismissal. Rule Appellate Procedure 28 alone justifies See generally Ramírez v. Debs-Elías, 407 F.3d 444, 446 n.1 (1st Cir. 2005). developed of This substantive failure to comply argument Further, the brief, by definition, offers no directed to petitioners' claims, necessary consequence that the claims are waived. with the See Jiang v. Gonzales, 474 F.3d 25, 32 (1st Cir. 2007) (citing United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir. 1990). Moreover, after reviewing the record we conclude that Rusli's claims fall well short of establishing the requisite eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, 1 or protection under the CAT. See, e.g., Lay's request for relief is derivative of his spouse's. -2- Attia v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 21, 24 (1st Cir. 2007); Susanto v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 57, 59-61 (1st Cir. 2006). It is so ordered. -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.