ANAIT SAROIAN V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 12-70082 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED DEC 26 2013 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANAIT SAROIAN, No. 12-70082 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-294-995 v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted December 17, 2013** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Anait Saroian, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency s finding that Saroian did not establish an objectively well-founded fear of persecution. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (concluding fear was too speculative under circumstances of case). Thus, Saroian s asylum claim fails. Because Saroian failed to meet the lower standard of proof for asylum, her claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190. Finally, substantial evidence supports the denial of CAT relief because Saroian failed to establish it is more likely than not that she will be tortured if returned to Armenia. See Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1113 (9th Cir. 2006). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 12-70082

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.