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.
Christony HARAHAP and Chandra Saragih, Petitioners, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM **
Petitioners Christony Harahap and Chandra Saragih (“Petitioners”), natives and citizens of Indonesia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen their removal proceedings. As the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recount them here. We grant the petition for review and remand to the BIA for reconsideration of Petitioners’ motion to reopen in light of our intervening opinion in Salim v. Lynch, 831 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2016).
In April 2008, an immigration judge denied Petitioners’ applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Petitioners, whose cases had been consolidated following their marriage, claimed that they feared persecution because of their Christian religion and Batak ethnicity if returned to Indonesia. The BIA dismissed Petitioners’ appeal, and we denied Petitioners’ petition for review. See Harahap v. Holder, 522 Fed.Appx. 392, 393 (9th Cir. 2013).
In September 2013, Petitioners moved the BIA to reopen the proceedings, asserting changed country conditions for Christians in Indonesia. The BIA denied the motion to reopen as untimely. The BIA determined that Petitioners failed to show materially changed country conditions for Christians in Indonesia or a prima facie individualized risk of persecution.
However, after the BIA’s decision, we issued our decision in Salim. Salim also concerned a Christian Indonesian, and it held that the BIA abused its discretion when it denied the petitioner’s motion to reopen as untimely. 831 F.3d at 1136, 1138-39. We concluded that, based on evidence similar to here, there was substantial evidence of materially changed country conditions for Christians in Indonesia between 2006 and 2013. Id. We also concluded that, based on similar evidence as in the instant case, including a letter from Salim’s sister, and considering that Christians in Indonesia are a “disfavored group,” the petitioner had sufficiently demonstrated an individualized risk of persecution. Id. at 1140-41.
Because the BIA did not have the benefit of Salim when rendering its decision in this case, we remand to allow the BIA to address the application of Salim to Petitioners’ motion to reopen in the first instance.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED AND REMANDED.
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. 14-70294
Decided: May 23, 2018
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)