Md Emran v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _________________ No. 19-1091 _________________ MD TUSER EMRAN a/k/a EMRAN MD TUSER, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA _________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A216-052-024) Immigration Judge: Daniel A. Morris _________________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) October 4, 2019 Before: SHWARTZ, SCIRICA, and FUENTES, Circuit Judges. (Filed: February 13, 2020) _________________ OPINION ** _________________ ** This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. FUENTES, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Md Tuser Emran, also known as Emran Md Tuser, seeks review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing the appeal, and in effect affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision to deny his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). For the following reasons, we will deny the petition for review. I. Emran is a native and citizen of Bangladesh. In September 2013, Emran was admitted to the United States on a nonimmigrant F-1 student visa. Emran later fell out of status by failing to attend school and working without authorization. Emran returned to Bangladesh in July 2017. A short time later, he returned to the United States and applied for re-admission in New York without valid entry documents. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) served Emran with a Notice to Appear charging him with removability under 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) as an applicant for admission into the United States without valid entry documents. DHS later added charges of removability under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(a)(6)(G) and 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). In October 2017, Emran applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection based on his political opinion. In support of his applications, Emran testified that he joined the Liberal Democratic Party (“LDP”) in Bangladesh, eventually becoming president of the student wing. One day, members of a political party called the Awami League (“AL”) approached Emran and tried to convince him to join their party. When Emran declined, 2 he claims he was beaten and his family was threatened. After escaping, Emran moved out of his residence and into a college hostel. Emran further testified that a few years later, members of the AL searched for him at his family’s home. When the AL did not find Emran, they vandalized his home and physically assaulted and kidnapped his brother. The men held Emran’s brother for seven days until his family sold half of their land and paid the ransom. After that incident, Emran lived in hiding in various locations. Nevertheless, on another occasion, individuals from the AL vandalized Emran’s garment store and forced the store manager to call Emran to set up a meeting. Emran waited for the store manager, but instead, members of the AL showed up and beat Emran again. He spent two days in the emergency room, and afterwards moved to Comilla, another city in Bangladesh. Finally, Emran testified ...

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