BINDU NEUPANE V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-72263 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MAY 20 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-72263 BINDU NEUPANE, Agency No. A098-527-534 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 16, 2014** San Francisco, California Before: McKEOWN and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and SELNA, District Judge.*** Bindu Neupane, a citizen and native of Nepal, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals s ( BIA ) final order dismissing her appeal from an * 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 Honorable James V. Selna, District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, sitting by designation. immigration judge s ( IJ ) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny Neupane s petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s determination that Neupane did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A); INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 84 (1992). Despite any anti-Maoist political opinion Neupane might hold, the record does not compel the conclusion that she was or will be persecuted by the Maoists on account of her political opinion or any other protected ground. Accordingly, Neupane has failed to establish eligibility for asylum. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 482 83. Having failed to establish eligibility for asylum, Neupane necessarily fails to meet the more stringent requirements for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006). Neupane s CAT claim is similarly unavailing because nothing in the record compels the conclusion that she will more likely than not be tortured at the instigation of, or with the acquiescence of, the Nepalese government if returned to Nepal. See Delgado v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1095, 1108 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc). PETITION DENIED.
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.
