Kanth v. Mukasey, No. 07-60837 (5th Cir. 2008)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 07-60837 Summary Calendar November 28, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk THANES KANTH, Also Known as Sebastiampillai Mariyathas Thanuskanth, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A94 788 934 Before SMITH, STEWART, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Thanes Kanth, a native and citizen of Sri Lanka, has filed a petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) denying his ap* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 07-60837 plication for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. The immigration judge ( IJ ) found that Kanth s testimony was not fully credible and that Kanth had failed to provide sufficient evidence to corroborate his claims. Although the BIA recognized the IJ s findings that Kanth s testimony was not credible and that Kanth had failed to establish a nexus between the harm he suffered and a protected asylum ground, the BIA dismissed Kanth s appeal based on the IJ s alternative determination that Kanth had failed to provide corroborating evidence in support of his claims or a sufficient explanation of why such evidence was not available. On a petition for review of a BIA decision, this court reviews the factual findings for substantial evidence. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007). Under the substantial evidence standard, a petition for review wil not be granted unless this court decides not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Where the trier of fact determines that the applicant should provide evidence that corroborates otherwise credible testimony, such evidence must be provided unless the applicant does not have the evidence and cannot reasonably obtain the evidence. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii); see also 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229a(c)(4), 1231(b)(3)(C). The BIA s determination that Kanth failed to satisfy his burden to provide evidence corroborating his claims is supported by substantial evidence, and Kanth has failed to demonstrate that the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Chen, 470 F.3d at 1134. The petition for review is DENIED. 2

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.