ROSS TAN V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 09-71077 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 21 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROSS FATMAHWATY TAN; et al., Petitioners, No. 09-71077 Agency Nos. A099-464-015 A099-464-016 A099-464-017 v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM * Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 6, 2012 ** Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. Ross Fatmahwaty Tan and her family, natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying their application for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence * 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). the agency s factual findings, and we review de novo the agency s legal determinations. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that the incidents of harassment and discrimination experienced by petitioners do not rise to the level of persecution. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1016-17 (9th Cir. 2003) (record did not compel finding that Ukrainian Pentecostal Christian who was teased, bothered, discriminated against and harassed suffered from past persecution); Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2003) (lifetime of harassment, threats, and mistreatment including one beating did not compel finding of past persecution). Further, substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that, even under a disfavored group analysis, petitioners have not shown sufficient individualized risk to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. See Halim v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 977-79 (9th Cir. 2009) (ethnic Chinese Indonesian failed to establish he was individually targeted or likely to be individually targeted); cf. Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 927-29 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, petitioners asylum claim fails. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 09-71077

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.