Givi Terentiev v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 18-1954 _____________ GIVI TERENTIEV, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent _____________ On Petition for Review from an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board No. A213-090-789) Immigration Judge: Kuyomars Q. Golparvar _____________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) April 30, 2019 _____________ Before: RESTREPO, ROTH, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. (Filed: October 11, 2019) _____________ OPINION* _____________ * This disposition is not an Opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. RESTREPO, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Givi Terentiev, a Georgian citizen, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA’s”) affirmance of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ’s”) final order of removal and dismissal of his withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). Terentiev argues that the BIA erred in mischaracterizing the Immigration Court record. For the reasons that follow, we will deny the petition for review. I. Terentiev identifies as ethnically Russian. In 2008, military conflict broke out between Russia and Georgia. As a result, Terentiev claims that Georgian attitudes towards Russians changed, making him the target of several criminal incidents in Georgia starting in 2009. He also claims the police became less responsive to crimes targeting his business. First, one of Terentiev’s businesses was set on fire. Terentiev submitted a report and written complaint to the police but they did not investigate. Second, a pipe bomb was placed in the same business. The police removed the pipe bomb but took no further action. Third, Terentiev was the victim of an armed robbery. The police reportedly “did nothing.” Pet. Br. 16. Fourth, Terentiev and his family were reportedly the target of many verbal and physical attacks by their neighbors. These incidents included cursing, threats, and having eggs, a brick, and “Molotov cocktail” explosives thrown at his house. Terentiev reported these incidents to the police and fire department, but no investigation followed. 2 On March 9, 2016, after multiple attempts to emigrate from Georgia, Terentiev entered the United States and overstayed his tourist visa. Terentiev was subsequently arrested for a driving violation, at which time he did not possess valid immigration documents. He was placed in removal proceedings in accordance with 8 U.S.C. §1227(a)(1)(B) and summoned to appear before the York Immigration Court. At his first hearing, Terentiev filed an I-589 form requesting asylum, statutory withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). His request was amended to include allegations of persecution based on political opinion and membership in a particular social group. The IJ denied Terentiev’s claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under CAT on the ground that his allegations did not rise to the level of persecution. The IJ clarified that Terentiev’s asylum application was untimely and that he was ineligible for CAT protection because it was unlikely he would be tortured by the Georgian government upon return. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision.1 Terentiev now ...

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