KAREN JILAVDARYAN V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 12-71137 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED DEC 9 2013 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KAREN JILAVDARYAN, Petitioner, No. 12-71137 Agency No. A200-908-550 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 19, 2013** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Karen Jilavdaryan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order ( BIA ) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. ยง 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency s factual findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review. Jilavdaryan contends he suffered past persecution and has a fear of future persecution by Armenian mobsters who extorted money from him. Substantial evidence supports the agency s denial of withholding of removal. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) ( An alien s desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft . . . bears no nexus to a protected ground. ); see also Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir. 2009) (a protected ground must be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant). We reject Jilavdaryan s contention that the BIA failed to address his arguments, and also reject his request for a remand. Substantial evidence also supports the agency s denial of Jilavdaryan s CAT claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in Armenia. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 12-71137
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.
