Case: 19-13865 Date Filed: 09/14/2020 Page: 1 of 15 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-13865 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A088-150-956 BAKHODIR SABITOVICH MADJITOV, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (September 14, 2020) Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 19-13865 Date Filed: 09/14/2020 Page: 2 of 15 Bakhodir Madjitov seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings as untimely, pursuant to Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) §240(c)(7)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i). The BIA concluded that Madjitov failed to establish any exception to the filing deadline because he had not shown that country conditions in Uzbekistan materially changed since his merits hearing in 2013. It also concluded that he had not shown that he was prima facie eligible for asylum under INA § 208(a), 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a), withholding of removal under INA § 241(b)(3), 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3), or withholding of removal under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”), 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c). Madjitov argues on appeal that the BIA incorrectly decided these questions because the evidence he submitted demonstrated both a prima facie case for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, and also that his evidence demonstrates material changed country conditions. After review, we affirm of the BIA, and dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. I. Background Madjitov, a native and citizen of Uzbekistan, entered the United States in March 2006 on a temporary visa. After his visa expired, he filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection on January 3, 2007, alleging 2 Case: 19-13865 Date Filed: 09/14/2020 Page: 3 of 15 that he was persecuted on the basis of political opinion and membership in a particular social group. He stated that he had been arrested, detained, and beaten by the police in May 2005 for participating in a peace demonstration, and threatened and attacked in June 2005 for believing in democracy, and he feared he would be arrested and harmed by the police if he was returned to Uzbekistan. In January 2007, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) served Madjitov with a notice to appear, which charged that he was removable for overstaying his visa, pursuant to INA § 237(a)(1)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B). Madjitov conceded removability as charged, indicated that he wished to apply for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief, and submitted a supplement to his application for relief. The immigration judge (“IJ”) ultimately denied his applications in May 2013 after finding he was not credible and that he failed to provide sufficient corroborating evidence.1 In July and October of 2014, the BIA dismissed Madjitov’s appeal and denied his motion for reconsideration. Madjitov did not seek judicial review. In January 2018, Madjitov, through counsel, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals