Liu, et al v. Holder, No. 06-73831 (9th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 10 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SIANG PIOW LIU, No. 06-73831 Petitioner, Agency No. A028-525-886 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted October 4, 2010 Pasadena, California Before: WARDLAW and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and TIMLIN, Senior District Judge.** Liu Siang Piow, a native and citizen of Malaysia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals decision finding his asylum application time-barred and denying withholding of removal. We deny the petition for review. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Robert J. Timlin, United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA s decision that an asylum application is untimely and not excused by changed circumstances unless the facts underlying the alleged change in circumstances are undisputed. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(3); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 650 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)). Liu alleged that the Malaysian government s monitoring of his internet activism constituted a changed circumstance. The immigration judge and the BIA did not credit Liu s testimony that any Malaysian agent monitored his postings. Therefore, the facts underlying the changed circumstances are disputed, and we must dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We deny the petition to review the BIA s decision denying withholding of removal. Substantial evidence supported the BIA s determination that Liu s testimony was not credible and that he did not establish that the Malaysian government was aware of his postings. Accordingly, Liu has failed to show that it is more likely than not that he will be persecuted based on his online postings. The petition is DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part. 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.
