Kiran Prajapati v. Eric H. Holder Jr., No. 08-71041 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JAN 19 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KIRAN PRAJAPATI, a.k.a. KUNAL PATEL, No. 08-71041 Agency No. A095-727-110 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM * v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted January 10, 2011 ** Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Kiran Prajapati, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction under * 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). 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that the attacks upon Prajapati and his family were tied to money disputes and that Prajapati failed to establish that a protected ground was at least one central reason for the attacks. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740-41 (9th Cir. 2009) ( [t]he Real ID Act requires that a protected ground represent one central reason for an asylum applicant s persecution ). Accordingly, Prajapati s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 (9th Cir. 2009). We do not address Prajapati s CAT claim because he did not specifically and distinctly challenge it in his opening brief. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005) (failure to raise a claim results in waiver). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 08-71041

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.