Case ID: f-appx_104/html/0652-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rajesh KUMAR, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-72047, [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 9, 2004.
    
    Decided Aug. 11, 2004.
    Charles E. Nichol, Law Office of Charles E. Nichol, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Lagu-na Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Linda S. Wernery, William K. Olivier, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before PREGERSON, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) failed to address Kumar’s claim that the past persecution he suffered was sufficiently “atrocious” to entitle him to asylum on humanitarian grounds, without the need to show a well-founded fear of future persecution. See Lopez-Galarza v. INS, 99 F.3d 954, 960-61 (9th Cir.1996). We express no opinion on the merits of this claim, but remand for the BIA to determine in the first instance. Kebede v. Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 808, 812 (9th Cir.2004).

PETITION GRANTED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.