Dvorak v. Garland


19-4130 Dvorak v. Garland BIA Farber, IJ A209 029 897/898 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United 3 States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, 4 on the 30th day of November, two thousand twenty-one. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JON O. NEWMAN, 8 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 9 SUSAN L. CARNEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 NIKOLAJ DVORAK, NATALIE 14 DVORAKOVA, 15 Petitioners, 16 17 v. 19-4130 18 NAC 19 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 20 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONERS: Theodore N. Cox, New York, 25 NY. 26 27 FOR RESPONDENT: Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting 28 Assistant Attorney General; 29 Jessica A. Dawgert, Senior 30 Litigation Counsel; Richard 31 Kelley, Trial Attorney, Office of 32 Immigration Litigation, United 1 States Department of Justice, 2 Washington, DC. 3 4 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 5 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 6 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 7 is DENIED. 8 Petitioners Nikolaj Dvorak and Natalie Dvorakova, 9 natives of Russia and citizens of the Czech Republic, seek 10 review of a November 15, 2019, decision of the BIA affirming 11 a May 16, 2019, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) 12 denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 13 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Nikolaj Dvorak, 14 Natalie Dvorakova, Nos. A209 029 897/898 (B.I.A. Nov. 15, 15 2019), aff’g Nos. A209 029 897/898 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City May 16 16, 2019). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 17 underlying facts and procedural history. 18 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as supplemented by 19 the BIA. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d 20 Cir. 2005). The applicable standards of review are well 21 established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yanqin Weng v. 22 Holder, 562 F.3d 510, 513 (2d Cir. 2009). 23 Asylum and Withholding of Removal 2 1 To establish eligibility for asylum and withholding of 2 removal, an applicant must establish past persecution or a 3 well-founded fear or likelihood of persecution on account of 4 “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular 5 social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. 6 § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i); see also id. § 1231(b)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. 7 …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals