PAMIR KURTI V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-71461 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED FEB 07 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 10-71461 PAMIR KURTI, Agency No. A095-180-614 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 5, 2014** Pasadena, California Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Pamir Kurti, a native and citizen of Albania, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge s order denying Kurti s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We review the Board s * 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). -2decision for substantial evidence, Avetova-Elisseva v. I.N.S., 213 F.3d 1192, 119697 (9th Cir. 2000), and we deny the petition.1 Petitioner credibly testified that, when he lived in Albania, he was a member of the Democratic Party, and that he had been detained and beaten following his participation in a political demonstration. However, substantial evidence supports the Board s determination that petitioner no longer has a well-founded fear of future persecution in light of a regime change in Albania, and the continued, nonproblematic residence in Albania of most of petitioner s seven siblings. See, e.g., Tamang v. Holder, 598 F.3d 1083, 1094 (9th Cir. 2010); Sowe v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1281, 1286 (9th Cir. 2008). Although one of petitioner s brothers was detained in 2007, petitioner did not establish that the basis for the detention was the brother s or the family s political involvement. The Board also conducted a sufficiently individualized analysis of petitioner s circumstances, because, among other things, the Board specifically distinguished the role petitioner held in the Democratic Party, versus that of petitioner s sibling and other party members, who were severely harmed. See, e.g., Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 1000 (9th Cir. 2003). 1 Petitioner s motion to supplement the record on review is granted. -3Petitioner s failure to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution also defeats his claim for withholding of removal. See Sowe, 538 F.3d at 1288. The Board s decision to deny CAT relief is also supported by substantial evidence. See El Himri v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 932, 938 (9th Cir. 2004) (denial of CAT relief supported by changed country conditions). PETITION DENIED.
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.
