Septantho Floribertus, et al v. Eric H. Holder Jr., No. 08-71334 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 25 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEPTANTHO FLORIBERTUS; et al., Petitioners, No. 08-71334 Agency Nos. A097-618-188 A097-618-190 A097-618-191 v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, MEMORANDUM * Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 19, 2010 ** Before: O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Septantho Floribertus and his family, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge s ( IJ ) decision denying Floribertus application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention * 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). Against Torture ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and review for substantial evidence factual findings. Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review. Contrary to petitioners assertion that the BIA did not affirm the IJ s adverse credibility determination, the BIA affirmed the IJ s decision based upon and for the reasons set forth therein and specifically found no clear error in the IJ s adverse credibility determination. See Molina-Estrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir. 2002). In their opening brief, petitioners fail to raise any challenge to the agency s adverse credibility determination, which is dispositive of Floribertus asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not supported by argument are deemed abandoned). Petitioners counsel is advised that the opening brief falls below the court s standards. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 08-71334

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.