Case ID: f-appx_107/html/0165-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lalta Persuad RAMNARINE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 03-72776.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Aug. 9, 2004.
    Decided Aug. 26, 2004.
    Alison Dixon, Law Office of Alison Dixon, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Robbin K. Blaya, Esq., Andrew C. MacLachlan, Esq., Larry P. Cote, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    
      Before PREGERSON, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Substantial evidence does not support the conclusion that the government was able to control the alleged persecutors. See Wang v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 1015, 1019-20 (9th Cir.2003); Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 967 n. 9 (9th Cir.1998). Therefore, we grant the petition and remand to the Board of Immigration Appeals for a determination of whether the treatment suffered by the petitioner rises to the level of persecution. Cf. Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339 (9th Cir.1995).

PETITION GRANTED AND REMANDED.

KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge,

dissenting.

Because petitioner, by his own admission, never sought the protection of his government, I dissent. 
      
       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.