FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT June 16, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 04- 12024 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ A ge nc yN o. A 78- 597- 805 R O M A N G E N N A D Y E V I C H P E T R O V , P e titio n e r , v ersu s U . S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( J une 16, 2005) B e f o r e T J O F L A T , A N D E R S O N a n d D U B I N A , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R I A M: R om a n G . P e tr ov, pr oc e e di ng pr o s e , pe t i t i ons f orr e vi e w of

the B oa r d of2

Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) deci si on af fi rm i ng the Im m i grat i on Judg e’ s ( “ IJ ”) order of re m ov al and d eni al of hi s a sy l um , w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al , and the U ni t ed N at i on s C on vent i on A gai nstT orture ( “ C A T ”) cl ai m s. P et i t i on er ’ s r em ov al pr oc e e di ngs c om m e nc e d a f t e rA pr i l 1, 1997, a nd the r e f or e the pe rm a ne ntrul e s of th e I l l e g a l I mm i g r a t i o n Re f o rm an d I mm i g r a n tRe s p o n s i b i l i tyAc to f 1 9 9 6 , Pub . L. N o . 1 0 4 - 2 0 8 , 1 1 0 S ta t. 3 0 0 9 ( 1 9 9 6 ) ap p ly . O n appe a l , P e tr ov c l a i m s tha the qua l i f i e d f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of re m ov al and C A T re l i ef . H e argues thatthe IJ ’ s a dv er se cr edi bi l i ty f i nd i ng w as erroneou s bec ause the IJes se nt i al l y t oo k adm i ni stra t i ve no t i ce w hen h e dec i ded thatw i tho utthe exi st ence of corr ob orat i ng do cum ent s, P etrov cou l d h ave notbeen a tta c k e d b yth e R u s s ia n n a tio n a lis ts f o rr e lig io u s r e a s o n s . P e tr o v c la im s th a t h is te s tim o n yw a s n o t o n lyd e ta ile d , in te rn a llyc o n s is te n t, a n d c o rr o b o r a te d w ith abunda nte vi de nc e , buta l s o pl aus i bl e i n l i ghtof the 2001 C ountryR e porta nd R el i gi ou s F re edom R eport . P etrov al so cl ai m s thathe w as ent i t l ed t o rel i ef un der C A T be c aus e the R us s i a n gove rnm e nti gnor e s the pe r s e c ut i on of r e l i gi ous gr oups b y th e n e o - N a z is . T he B IA ’ s f

ac tual det erm i nat i on s are re vi ew ed un der the subst ant i al e vi de nc e t e s t , a nd thi s C ourt“ m us ta f f i rm the B I A ’ s de c i s i on i f i ti s ‘ s upport e d by reaso n ab l e, su b st an t i al , an d p ro b at i v e ev i d en ce o n th e reco rd co n si d ered as a w hol e . ’ ” A l N a

jj a rv. A s hc r of

t , 257 F . 3d 1262, 1283- 84 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( c i t a t i on3

o m i tt e d ) . He r e , th e B I A b o th a d o p t e d th e I J ’ s r e a s o n i n g a n d m a d e i t s o wn obs e rva t i ons , s o thi s C ourts houl d r e vi e w the B I A ’ s or de ra nd the I J ’ s or de r , t o the e x te n t th e B I A a d o p te d th e I J ’s r e a s o n in g . I d . a t 1 2 8 4 . C r e d ib ilityd e te rm in a tio n s lik e w is e a r e r e v ie w e d u n d e rth e s u b s ta n tia le vi de nc e t e s t . D - M uhum e d v. U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt orne yG e ne r a l , 388 F . 3d 814, 817- 18 (11th C i r. 20 04 ). T he tri erof fa ctm ustdet erm i ne cr edi bi l i ty, and thi s C ou rt m a yn o t s u b s titu te its ju d g m e n t f o rth a t o f th e B I A w ith r e s p e c t to c r e d ib ility fin d in g s. Id . “ A n im m ig ra ti o n ju d g e a lo n e is in a p o siti o n to o b se rv e a n alien ’s to n e a n d d e m e a n o r , to e x p lo r e in c o n s is te n c ie s in te s tim o n y , a n d to ap p lyw o rk ab le and con si st entst andards i n the eval uat i on of t es t i m on i al evi dence. ” S a rvi a - Q ui nt a ni l l av. U . S . I N S , 767 F . 2d 1387, 1395 ( 9th C i r . 1985) ( pe r s ua s i ve author i ty ) ; a c c or d A bdul r a hm a n v. A s hc r of t , 330 F . 3d 587, 597 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( s a m e ) . A n a l i e n w ho a rr i ve s i n ori s pr e s e nti n the U ni t e d S t a t e s m a yappl yf or as yl um . S ee IN A § 2 08 (a )( 1), 8 U . S . C . § 1 15 8(a) (1). T he A tt orney G ener al has di sc re t i on t o g rantas yl um i f the al i en m ee t s the IN A ’ s def i ni t i on of a “ re fugee. ” S ee IN A § 2 0 8 (b )(1 ), 8 U . S . C . § 1 1 5 8 (b )(1 ). A “ refu g ee” i s any per son w ho i s out si de any c ou ntryof such pers on ’ s nat i on al i ty or, in th e c a s e o f

ap e r s o n h a v in g n o n a tio n a lity , is o u ts id e a n yc o u n tryin w hi c h s uc h pe r s on l a s thabi tua l l yr e s i de d, a nd w ho i s unabl e or unw i l l i ng t o r e turn t o, a nd i s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o a va i l hi m s e l f or hers el f of the prot ec t i on of, thatcoun trybecause of p er se cu ti on or a4

w e l l - f ou n d e d f

e ar of p e r s e c u t i on on ac c ou n t of r a c e , r e l i gi on , n a tio n a lity , m e m be r s hi p i n a pa r t i c ul a r s o c i a lg r o up , or po l i t i ca l o p in io n . . .. 8 U . S . C . § 101( a ) ( 42) ( A ) ( e m pha s i s a dde d) . T he a s y l um appl i c a ntc a rr i e s the b u r d e n o f

p r o v in g s ta tu to ry“r e f

u g e e ” s ta tu s . A l N a

jja r , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 8 4 . T o e s tab lis h a s y lu m e lig ib ility , th e a lie n m u s t, w ith s p e c if ic a n d c r e d ib le evi dence, es t abl i sh (1) pas tpers ec ut i on on ac coun tof hi s r el i gi on (or other st atut ori l y l i st ed fa ct or), or (2) a“ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ” thathi s r el i gi on (or other s ta tu to r ilylis te d f

a c to r ) w ill c au s e s u c h f

u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n . 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 3 ( a ) , ( b) ; A l N a

jj a r , 257 F . 3d a t1287. A “ w el l -f ou nd ed fe ar ” of f

uture pers ec ut i on m ay be es t abl i shed by show i ng (1) pas tpers ec ut i on thatcr eat es a pre sum pt i on of a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a ra n d o v e r c o m e s a n yr e b u tta l b yth e I N S , ( 2 ) ar e a s o n ab le pos s i bi l i tyof

pe r s ona l pe r s e c ut i on tha tc a nnotbe a voi de d byr e l oc a t i ng w i thi n the s ubj e c tc ountry , or( 3) apa tt e rn orpr a c t i c e i n the s ubj e c tc ountryof pe r s e c ut i ng me mb e r s o f

as t a tu t o r i l yd e f

i n e d g r o u p o f

w h i c h th e a l i e n i s ap a rt . 8 C. F. R. § 208. 13( b) ( 1) , ( 2) . T he “ w e l l - f ounde d f e ar ” i nqui ryha s both as ubj e c t i ve a nd obj e c t i ve c om pone nt– tha ti s , the appl i c a ntm us ts how tha thi s f e a rof pe r s e c ut i on is s u b je c tiv e lyg e n u in e a n d o b je c tiv e lyr e a s o n ab le . A l N a jja r , 2 5 7 F .3 d a t 1 2 8 9 . T h e s u b je c tiv e c o m p o n e n t is g e n e r a llys a tis f ie d b yth e ap p lic a n t's c r e d ib le te s tim o n yth a t h e o rs h e g e n u in e lyf e a r s p e r s e c u tio n . I d . T h is C o u rt n o te d th a t “in m o stcases, th e o b

j ect i v e p ro n g can b e fu l fi l l ed ei th er b y est ab l i sh i n g p ast5

p e r s e c u tio n o rth a t h e o rs h e h a s a‘g o o d r e a s o n to f e a rf u tu r e p e r s e c u tio n .’” I d . A n a lie n ’s u n c o rr o b o r a te d b u t c r e d ib le te s tim o n ya lo n e m a yb e s u f f ic ie n t to s us t a i n the bur de n of

pr oof f ora s y l um orw i thhol di ng of r e m ova l . D - M uhum e d, 38 8 F . 3d at81 9. H ow ever , the w ea ker the appl i cant ’ s t es t i m on y, the m ore com pel l i ng i s the need for corr ob orat i ve do cum ent ary or other t es t i m on i al e vi de nc e . M a tt e rof

Y - D - , 21 I & N D e c . 1136, 1138 ( B I A 1998) . “ ‘ [ I ] f the tr i e rof f a c te i the rdoe s notbe l i e ve the appl i c a ntordoe s notknow w ha tt o be l i e ve , the appl i c a nt ’ s f

a i l ur e t o c orr obor a t e hi s t e s t i m onyc a n be f a t a l t o hi s a s y l um appl i c a t i on. ’ ” F or gue v. A tt orne y G e ne r a l , 401 F . 3d 1282 ( 11th C i r . 2005) (q u o t i n g S i d h u v . IN S , 2 2 0 F . 3 d 1 0 8 5 , 1 0 9 0 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 0 )). A n ad v erse c r e di bi l i tyf

i ndi ng m us tgo t o the he a rtof the a s y l um c l a i m , a nd notbe ba s e d on m i nordi s c r e pa nc i e s , i nc ons i s t e nc i e s , a nd om i s s i ons . G a o v. A s hc r of t , 299 F . 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C i r . 2002) ( pe r s ua s i ve author i ty ) ; s e e a l s o P op v. I N S , 270 F . 3d 527, 531 ( 7th C i r . 2001) ( s a m e ) ; C he n v. I N S , 266 F . 3d 1094, 1098 ( 9th C i r . 2001) (s am e) , vaca t ed on other groun ds by 53 7 U . S . 10 16 (200 2). A n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ility f i ndi ng, s upport e d bys ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e , m a ybe s uf f i c i e ntt o ape t i t i on f

or r e vi e w . D - M uhum e d, 388 F . 3d a t819. T he I Jm us tof f e rs pe c i f i c , c oge ntr e a s ons f o ra n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g . I d . A n a lie n s e e k in g w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l u n d e rth e I N A m u s t s h o w th a t h is lif e o rf r e e d o m w o u ld “m o r e lik e lyth a n n o t” b e th r e a te n e d u p o n r e tu rn to h is6

coun trybecause of, am on g o ther thi ng s, hi s r el i gi on . M endo zav. U ni t ed S t at es A tt orney G en. , 32 7 F . 3d 12 83 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 20 03 ). T he bu rden of proo f und er C A T i s hi ghe rtha n the bur de n i m pos e d on a n a s y l um appl i c a nt . S e e A l N a jj a r , 257 F .3 d a t 1 3 0 3 - 0 3 . W h ile it is tru e th a t th e m a jo r ityo f th e in c o n s is te n c ie s th e I Jid e n tif ie d in P e tr o v ’s te s tim o n ya n d th e a s y lu m ap p lic a tio n w e r e m in o ro rw e r e n o t a c tu a lly i ncon si st enci es , the IJ ’ s a dv er se cr edi bi l i ty f i nd i ng i s s up po rt ed by subst ant i al e v i d e n c e b e c au s e tw o w e r e tru e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s a n d th e yw e r e r e l a t e d t o h i s c l a i ms tha tC apt a i n M e l ni c he nko us e d ne o- N a z i s t o pe r s e c ut e hi m ba s e d on hi s r e l i gi on, w hi c h i s the he a rtof

hi s c l a i m . F i r s t , P e tr ov c l a i m e d tha the w a s a tt a c ke d a nd b e a te n b y f

iv e p e r s o n s , a lle g e d lyh ir e d b yF e d e r a l S e c u r ityS e rv ic e ( F S B ) C ap ta in M e l ni c he nko, on M a r c h 3, 1994. T he yc a l l e d hi m a“ tr a i t or ” a nd a“ di rtype r s on of ad if f e r e n t f a ith .” T h e a tta c ko c c u rr e d ad a ya f te rP e tr o v r e f

u s e d to r e p o rt to M el ni chenko abou tthe forei gn stud ent s a thi s s choo l because, he t es t i fi ed, he w as in f lu e n c e d b yh is m o th e r ’s r e lig io n , J e h o v a h ’s W itn e s s e s , n o t to g e t in v o lv e d w ith th e g o v ern m en t. H o w ev er , th is attack p ro b ab ly w as n o t m o ti v ated b y P etro v ’s fa i th b ec ause he di d n otengage i n any Je ho vah’ s W i tness ac t i vi ty unt i l S ept em ber 1 9 9 4 , a n d M e ln ic h e n k o d id n o t k n o w th is w a s th e r e a s o n th a t P e tr o v r e f u s e d to becom e asni t ch. S ec on d, even tho ug h i n h i s a sy l um appl i ca t i on P etrov cl ai m ed th a t th e F S B o f

te n u s e d th e n e o - N a z is to w a tc h th e “o p p o s itio n p e o p le a n d s im p ly7

beatthem up , ” there w as no evi dence i n the re cord supp ort i ng hi s a ss ert i on . E ven though P e tr ov s t a t e d tha tdur i ng the thr e a t e ni ng phone c a l l s tha ts t a rt e d a f t e rhe re fuse d t o coo pera t e w i th M el ni chenko the neo-N az i s r ef erre d t o a “ re spec t ed pers on , ” thi s e vi dence does notcom pel us t o rej ec tthe IJ ’ s f i nd i ng thatthere w as no c onne c t i on be tw e e n M e l ni c he nko a nd the thr e a t e ni ng phone c a l l s , the v a n d a lis m o f

h is m a ilb o x a n d d o o r , a n d th e a s s au lt o n h is f a th e rb yth e n e o - N a z is . A d d itio n a lly , e v e n if

P e tr o v ’s te s tim o n yw e r e c r e d ib le , h is a s y lu m c la im f a i l s be c aus e hi s f

e a rof pe r s e c ut i on w a s notobj e c t i ve l yr e a s onabl e be c aus e the gove rnm e ntc a rr i e d i t s bur de n of pr oof bys how i ng tha the c oul d e s c ape the pers ec ut i on by re l ocat i ng w i thi n R ussi a. F i nal l y, P etrov’ s w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al a nd C A T c l a i m s a l s o f

a i l be c aus e he w a s unabl e t o m e e tthe bur de n of pr oof r e qui r e d f

ora s y l um , w hi c h i s al ow e rbur de n tha n tha tr e qui r e d f orw i thhol di ng of r e m o v a l a n d r e lie f

u n d e rth e C A T . Up o n r e v i e w o f

th e r e c o r d , a n d h a v i n g c o n s i d e r e d th e b r i e f o f th e p a rt i e s , we di sc ern n o revers i bl e e rr or. F or al l the fore go i ng re as on s, subst ant i al evi dence s u p p o rts th e B I A ’s d e c is io n , a n d w e d e n yth e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.8