Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
MOHAMMAD KHALEEL AL BATTAT, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM*
Mohammad Khaleel Al Battat, a native of Palestine and citizen of Jordan, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (“BIA”) order upholding the Immigration Judge's (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under Article III of the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), as well as his petition for special rule cancellation of removal pursuant to the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition.
1. The BIA held that Al Battat failed to appeal the merits of the IJ's determinations that he was ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief, and that his asylum claim was time-barred. On appeal, Al Battat concedes that his asylum claim was time-barred, and he offers no challenge to the BIA's determination that any arguments about withholding of removal or CAT relief were not preserved for appeal. Any arguments related to those forms of relief are thus unexhausted, and we lack jurisdiction to review them. See Alvarado v. Holder, 759 F.3d 1121, 1127 (9th Cir. 2014).
2. The BIA affirmed the IJ's determination that Al Battat failed to corroborate his claim of spousal mental abuse and, therefore, affirmed denial of his application for special rule cancellation of removal. Al Battat does not argue that such corroboration was unnecessary; he states only that he does not know why the requested corroboration was unavailable. Al Battat has thus failed to demonstrate that the record compels the conclusion that corroborating evidence was unavailable, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4), and he offers no other basis for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 14-70500
Decided: November 16, 2016
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)