ATRINE LALENOH V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-73413 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 21 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ATRINE LALENOH, No. 10-73413 Petitioner, Agency No. A088-089-852 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted December 19, 2012 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Atrine Lalenoh, native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. * 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). § 1252. We review de novo legal findings and review for substantial evidence factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny Lalenoh s petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that Lalenoh did not suffer past persecution. See id. at 1059-60. While her experiences include, among other things, attending several churches that were later burned or destroyed and being threatened by a business competitor, a reasonable fact-finder would not be compelled to find that they rose to the level of persecution. See Halim v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 975-76 (9th Cir. 2009); cf. Baballah v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1067, 1074-76 (9th Cir. 2004) (recognizing economic persecution where severe harassment, threats, physical violence, and discrimination made it almost impossible for petitioner to earn a living). Substantial evidence also supports the agency s finding that even under a disfavored group analysis, Lalenoh failed to establish a risk of individualized harm sufficient to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution. See Halim, 590 F.3d at 978-80. Her asylum claim fails. Because Lalenoh could not meet her burden of establishing eligibility for asylum, the agency correctly found she could not meet the heavier burden of qualifying for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006). 2 10-73413 Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency s denial of CAT relief because Lalenoh failed to establish it is more likely than not she will be tortured if she returns to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 10-73413

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.