2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 9-24-2009 

# S e rn a-G arc i a v

. Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-2254

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" S e rn a -G ar c i a v

. Atty Ge n U SA" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 609. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/609NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 04- 2254

___________ ANA MI L E NA S E RN A- GAR CI A, Pet i t i oner

v. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES, R es pondent

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( B I A N o. A 79- 425- 124) ( U . S. I m m i gr at i on J udge: H onor abl e H enryS. D ogi n)

_______________________________________ Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

Sept ember9, 2009 B efor e: C hi ef J udge SC I R I C A , C H A G A R E S and A L D I SE R T , C i r cui tJ udges ( Fi l ed: Sept ember24, 2009)

_________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_________ P E R C U R I A M. A na M i l ena Serna- G ar ci a pet i t i ons forr evi ew of the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A p p e a ls’ (“ B IA ” ) f

in a l o rd e r o f

re m o v a l. W e w ill g ra n t h e r p e tit io n in p a rt, d e n yit i n part , and rem and for further proceedings.W e r ece nt l ys um m ar i zed FA R C ’ s r ol e i n t he ongoi ng C ol om bi an ci vi l w ari n G om ez- 1 Z ul uaga v. A t t or neyG ener al , 527 F. 3d 330, 335 ( 3d C i r . 2008) , and thos e bac kgr ound obs ervat i ons appl yequal l yt o t he r ecor d i n t hi s cas e. 2 I. Ser na- G ar ci a i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of C ol om bi a. She arr i ved i n t he U ni t ed St at es i n 2001 w i t houta val i d entr ydocument , and the G overnm enti ns t i tut ed r emoval p roc ee d ing s. S ern a-G arc ia co n ce d es re m o v ab il ity , b u t seek s asy lum , statu tory w i t hh oldi ng of rem ov al , and w i t hh oldi ng of rem ov al un der the C on ven t i on A gainst T or tur e ( “C A T ”) . Ser na- G ar ci a cl ai m s t hats he fe ar s bei ng ki dnaped a nd t or tur ed byt he l eft i s tguer i l l a r evol ut i onarygr oup know n as t he Fuer zas A r m adas R evol uci onar i as de C ol om bi a ( “FA R C ”) on acc ountof heri m put ed pol i t i cal opi ni on and mem ber s hi p i n a par t i cul ars oci al gr oup. 1 S e rn a -G a rc ia’ s m o th e r m o v e d to th e U n ited S tate s in 2 0 0 0 , lea v in g S e rn a -G a rc ia ( t hen tw entyy ear s of age ) t o car e forherfour - y ear - ol d s i s t er . Ser na- G ar ci a al s o l i ved w ith h e r o ld e r b ro th e r. T h e ir f a m ilyis a f

f lu e n t, an d th e yo w n th re e h o m e s in C o lo m b ia and have w eal t hyr el at i ves i n t he U ni t ed St at es . Ser na- G ar ci a cl ai m s t hats he fl ed t o t he U ni t ed St at es aft err ece i vi ng appr oxi m at el ys i x t hr eat eni ng phone ca l l s overa per i od of appr oxi m at el ys i x w eeks . T he ca l l er s di d noti dent i fyt hemsel ves , buts he bel i eves t hem t o be mem ber s of FA R C . T he ca l l er s demanded t hats he pay15 m i l l i on pes os and th re a te n e d th a t, if

s h e re f u s e d , th e yw o u ld k id n a p a n d o th e rw is e h a rm h e r o r h e r s is te r.3

Ser na- G ar ci a bel i eves t hats he w as t ar get ed fort hes e thr eat s beca us e s he i s a s i ngl e y oung w om an o f fi nan ci al m eans. Ser na- G ar ci a t es t i fi ed t o t he for egoi ng atherhear i ng befor e the I m m i gr at i on J udge (“IJ”). ( A . 1 5 3 , 1 6 0 -63 . ) S h e a lso a ck n o w ledg ed that, tho u g h sh e d o es n o t sup p o rt F A R C , sh e h as n ev er tak en an yac ti o n ag ains t i t. (A . 1 5 1 . ) T h e IJ a ck n o w ledg ed F A R C ’s pervas i ve us e of ki dnapi ng and ext or t i on and found c r edi bl e Serna- G ar ci a’ s t es t i m ony that F A R C h ad threa tene d h er. T h e IJ d en ied a sy lum an d statu toryw ith h o lding , h o w ev er, beca us e he c oncl uded thatt hos e thr eat s w er e mot i vat ed mer el ybyFA R C ’ s des i r e t o fund i t s oper at i ons and notbyanypol i t i cal opi ni on hel d bySer na- G ar ci a. T he I J al s o s t at ed t hatw eal t h coul d notform t he bas i s fora pol i t i cal as y l um cl ai m , t hough he neve r s peci fi cal l yaddr es s ed Serna- G ar ci a’ s cl ai m t hats he i s a mem berof a pa r t i cul ars oci al g r o u p . T h e I J d e n i e d S e r n a - Ga r c i a ’ s CA T c l a i m o n t h e s o l e b a s i s t h a ts h e h a d n o ts h o wn an ythrea t from the C o lom b ian g o v ern m en t ( as o p p o sed to F A R C ). Ser na- G ar ci a al s o t es t i fi ed aboutot herci r cumst ance s , w hi ch the I J found nott o be cr edi bl e. She t es t i fi ed thatherbr ot heri s as s oci at ed w i t h FA R C , t hathe i s vi ol entand has ab u sed h er, an d that h e o n ce threa tene d to tak e the iry o u n g er sist er f rom h er. ( A . 1 5 7 -59 . ) Ser na- G ar ci a di d notpr es entt hes e al l egat i ons as an i ndepende ntcl ai m forr el i ef, al t hough t he I J appea r s t o have be l i eved s he di d. T he I J r ej ect ed hert es t i m onyaboutherbr ot her beca us e Serna- G ar ci a had notm ent i oned herbr ot herdur i ng herai rpor torcr edi bl e fe ar i nterview s and h ad p rovi ded no corr ob orat i on (forexam ple, bycal l i ng her m otheras aW e sta y e d th is p e tit io n a t S e rn a -G a rc ia’ s re q u e st f o r a p p ro x im a telyf

o u r y e a rs w h ile 2 s he pur s ued an a ppl i cat i on foran adj us t m entof s t atus bas ed on herm arr i age t o a U ni t ed St at es ci t i zen. T hatappl i cat i on has now been de ni ed, and w e have l i ft ed the s t ay . T he p a rt ie s h a v e f

ile d s u p p le m e n ta l b ri e f

s , a n d th is p e titio n is ri p e f o r d is p o s itio n . 4 w itn ess). S ern a-G arc ia also testi fied that, w h il e sh e w as in co ll eg e, F A R C m em b ers s om et i m es di s rupt ed cl as s r oom s w i t h guns and bombs and c aus ed the s chool t o cl os e for a per i od of m ont hs . T he I J di d nots peci fi cal l yr ej ectt hi s t es t i m ony , butdi s m i s s ed i tas an at t empt t o “i nt er

j ecti deol ogyi nt o t hi s cas e, ” w hi ch he r ej ect ed. Ser na- G ar ci a appe al ed, a n d t h e BI A s u mm a r i l ya f f i r me d . S h e n o w p e t i t i o n s f o rr e v i e w. 2 II. W e have j ur i s di ct i on under8 U . S. C . § 1252. “W her e, as her e, t he B I A aff i r m s t he I J ’ s deci s i on w i t houtopi ni on, w e r evi ew t he I J ’ s deci s i on as t he fi nal agenc y d e t e r mi n a t i o n . ” P i e r r e v . At t ’ yGe n . , 5 2 8 F . 3 d 1 8 0 , 1 8 4 ( 3 d Ci r . 2 0 0 8 ) . I n d o i n g s o , we r evi ew l egal i s s ues de novo, s ubj ectt o es t abl i s hed pr i nci pl es of def er ence , and r evi ew any fa ctua l determ ination s fo r sub stan ti al ev iden ce , w h ich m ea n s tha t w e m ayn o t distu rb t hem unl es s “‘ anyr eas onabl e adj udi cat orw oul d be compel l ed t o concl ude t o t he contr ary . ’ ” G om ez- Z ul uaga v. A t t ’ yG en. , 527 F. 3d 330, 339- 40 ( 3d C i r . 2008) ( quot i ng 8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) ( B ) ) . U nderpr i nci pl es of age ncyr evi ew , w e maynotr eac h i s s ues that the IJ d id n o t add ress. S ee IN S v . V en tura, 53 7 U . S . 1 2 , 1 6 (20 0 2 ). T h u s, if th e IJ fa il ed to ad d ress a claim o r ap p li ed the w ron g lega l st an d ard , w e m u st r em an d fo r th e B IA t o addr es s t he cl ai m orappl yt he pr opers t andar d i n t he fi r s ti ns t ance . See V al di vi ezo-F o r th is re a so n , w e re jec t th e G o v e rn m e n t’s re p e a ted in v itatio n s to a f f irm o n th e b a sis 3 of i s s ues t hatt he I J di d notr eac h. S erna- G arci a did not r ai se anyi ssue r egardi ng po l i t i cal op i nion bef ore the B IA , so 4 th e re is s o m e q u e s tio n o f w h e th e r s h e h a s e x h a u s te d th is c la im . S e e 8 U .S .C . § 1252( d) ( 1) . B uts ee Si ngh v. G onzal es , 413 F. 3d 156, 160 n. 3 ( 1s tC i r . 2005) ( fi ndi ng j ur i s di ct i on overcl ai m s notr ai s ed bef or e the B I A w her e the B I A s um m ar i l yaff i r m ed the I J ’ s deci s i on) ( ci t ed i n L i n v. A t t ’ yG en. , 543 F. 3d 114, 123 ( 3d C i r . 2008) ) . W e nee d not 5 G al damez v. A t t ’ yG en. , 502 F. 3d 285, 291 ( 3d C i r . 2007) ( ci t i ng V entur a, 537 U . S. at 16) . Ser na- G ar ci a r ai s es es s ent i al l yfourar gum ent s , w hi ch w e w i l l addr es s i n tur n. 3 A . A s y l um and St atut or yW i thhol di ng of R emoval E ach of Ser na- G ar ci a’ a fi r s tt w o ar gum ent s i s addr es s ed both t o hercl ai m for a sy lu m a n d f

o r sta tu to ryw ith h o ld in g o f re m o v a l. T h o se f

o rm s o f re lief a re a v a ilab le o n ly t o a l i e n s w h o h a v e b e e n p e r s e c u t e d o rf a c e p e r s e c u t i o n o n a c c o u n to f a s t a tu t o r i l ypr ot ect ed gr ound— i . e. , “r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i t y , m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, orpol i t i cal opi ni on[. ] ” See G om ez- Z ul uaga, 527 F. 3d at340, 348. T he I J di d not r eac h t he i s s ues of w hetherSer na- G ar ci a’ s pot ent i al m i s t r eatm entr i s es t o t he l evel of p erse cu ti o n o r w h ethe r she h as a w ell -fo u n d ed fe ar o f p erse cu ti o n o r sho w ed itm o re l i kel yt han nott o occur . See i d. at345, 348- 49. I ns t ead, he deni ed thes e cl ai m s on t he s ol e bas i s t hats uch mi s t r eatm entw oul d notbe “on a ccountof” a nys t atut or i l y - pr ot ect ed g ro u n d . S ern a-G arc ia arg u es th at th e IJ e rred in tw o resp ec ts. F ir st, sh e a rgu es th at th e IJ err ed bec aus e FA R C i n fac tt ar get ed herbeca us e of he ri m put ed pol i t i cal opi ni on. T he r ecor d, how ever , does notcompel t hatconcl us i on. A s y l um and w i t hhol di ng pr ovi de 4addr es s t hati s s ue, how ever , beca us e Serna- G ar ci a’ s ar gum entcl ear l yl acks m er i t . See

J o rd o n v . A tt’ yG e n ., 4 2 4 F .3 d 3 2 0 , 3 2 5 n .8 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). 6 pr ot ect i on fr om “per s ecut i on on acc ountof the vi ct i m ’ s pol i t i cal opi ni on, nott he per s ecut or ’ s . ” I N S v. E l i as - Z aca r i as , 502 U . S. 478, 482 ( 1992) . T he opi ni on m aybe the vi ct i m ’ s actual opi ni on orone i m put ed t o herbyt he per s ecut or . See G om ez- Z ul uaga, 527 F. 3d at344. I n ei t herevent , how ever , an appl i cantm us tpr ovi de evi dence t hatheractual ori m put ed opi ni on i s w hatm ot i vat es t he per s ecut or . See i d. at343. I n t hi s cas e, t he I J pr oper l yconcl uded thatt her e i s no evi dence of r ecor d t hat FA R C has t ar get ed Serna- G ar ci a on ac countof heractual pol i t i cal opi ni ons oranyt hat FA R C i m put es t o her . O n t he contr ary , s he ac know l edges t hats he neve rt ook anyact i on agai ns tFA R C , and di d nott es t i fyt hatt he thr eat eni ng t el ephone c al l s i ncl uded any acc us at i ons aboutheraff i l i at i ons orbel i efs . N ordi d s he pr es entanyot herevi dence of p o litic a l a f

f ilia tio n o r a c tiv ity. Ser na- G ar ci a neve r t hel es s ar gues t hatFA R C i m put es a pol i t i cal opi ni on t o her beca us e i tus es ki dnapi ng t o t ar get“cl as s enemi es ” forpol i t i cal r eas ons . T he r ecor d does s how t hatt her e i s a pol i t i cal el ementt o FA R C ’ s us e of ki dnapi ng. ( A . 263, A . 319, A . 325. ) FA R C ’ s ow n pol i t i cal m ot i vat i on, how ever , does notm ean thati ti m put es any po l i t i cal op i nion t o it s t arget s general l yor t o S erna- G arci a i n p art i cular . S ee E l i asZ ac aria, 5 0 2 U . S . at 48 2 . S ee also O rejue la v. G o n za les, 4 2 3 F . 3 d 6 6 6 , 6 7 4 (7th C ir . 2005) ( r ej ect i ng s i m i l arcl ai m fort hi s r eas on even though pet i t i onerbel onged t o w eal t hyA s t he G overnm entar gues , Ser na- G ar ci a r el i es on r epor t s t hatar e notpar tof the 5 agenc yr ecor d. W e thus do notcons i dert hem. See 8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) ( A ) . W e not e, how ever , t hateven the 2001 U ni t ed St at es C us t om s and I m m i gr at i on Ser vi ces R epor ton w hi ch s he pr i nci pal l yr el i es des cr i bes onl yFA R C ’ s ow n pol i t i cal m ot i vat i ons , and does n o t c o m p e l th e c o n c lu s io n th a t it g e n e ra lly im p u te s a p o litic a l o p in io n to its ta rg e ts . Ser na- G ar ci a al s o not es t hatan as y l um offi cerdet erm i ned athercr edi bl e fe ari nt ervi ew t hathercl ai m i s bas ed on pol i t i cal opi ni on. She does notar gue thatt he I J w as bound by o r o w e d d e f

e re n c e to th a t c o n c lu s io n , h o w e v e r, a n d w e d o n o t b e lie v e h e d id . 7 cl as s unl i kel yt o s har e FA R C ’ s pol i t i cal opi ni ons ) . A ccor di ngl y , t he r ecor d does not compel t he conc l us i on t hatFA R C t ar get ed Serna- G ar ci a forheri m put ed pol i t i cal opi ni on. 5 Second, Ser na- G ar ci a ar gues t hatt he I J err ed i n fai l i ng t o addr es s w hethers he q u a lif ie s f o r a s y lu m o r w ith h o ld in g a s a m e m b e r o f a p a rt ic u la r s o c ia l g ro u p . W e a g re e . Ser na- G ar ci a s quar el ypr es ent ed a c l ai m bas ed on herm ember s hi p i n a pot ent i al s oci al gr oup t o bot h t he I J and the B I A . She cl ai m s t o bel ong t o a s oci al gr oup composed of y oung, s i ngl e w om en w i t h fi nanci al m eans w ho ar e vul ner abl e t o ki dnapi ng and have been thr eat ened byFA R C . C f. G om ez- Z ul uaga, 527 F. 3d at345 ( r ecogni zi ng s oci al gr oup defi ned as “w om en w ho have e s cape d i nvol unt arys ervi tude af t erbei ng abduct ed and conf i ned byt he FA R C ”) ; O r ej uel a, 423 F. 3d at672 ( r ecogni zi ng s oci al gr oup defi ned as “ the e d u ca ted, l an d o w n ing class o f c att le fa rm ers targ eted b yF A R C ”). N eith er the IJ nort he B I A , how ever , addr es s ed w hethert hatcat egoryqual i fi es as a part i cul ars oci alT he I J di d noti m pl i ci t l ydeci de thi s cl ai m byrul i ng t hatw eal t h i s nota bas i s for 6 pol i t i cal as y l um . T he I J s t at ed mer el yt hat“I ’ m notgoi ng t o expand the I N A A ctt o cover an yb o d ythat’s go t a do ll ar in the irp o ck et. ” (IJ D ec . at 11 ) (A . 1 1 3 ). S ern a-G arc ia’s cl ai m i s bas ed on more t han w eal t h al one, and the I J di d notm ent i on a pot ent i al s oci al gr oup cl ai m , l etal one ci t e orappl yt he r el evants t andar d. See Escoba rv. G onzal es , 417 F. 3d 363, 366- 69 ( 3d C i r . 2005) ( expl ai ni ng t he s t andar d and s ur vey i ng s oci al gr oup claim s). 8 gr oup orot herw i s e addr es s ed thi s cl ai m . T hus , as Ser na- G ar ci a ar gues , w e mustr emand 6 fort he B I A t o do s o i n t he fi r s ti ns t ance . See V al di vi ezo- G al damez, 502 F. 3d at291. B . T h e C A T C laim Ser na- G ar ci a nextar gues t hatt he I J appl i ed the w r ong l egal s t andar d i n r ej ect i ng herC A T cl ai m . W e fi nd t hatar gum entper s uas i ve as w el l . T hi s cl ai m r equi r ed SernaG a rc ia to sh o w b o th th a t “it is m o re lik e lyth a n n o t th a t sh e w ill b e to rtu re d if re m o v e d to C ol om bi a, and thats uch t or tur e w i l l occurw i t h t he cons entoracqui es cenc e of the [C ol om bi an] governm ent . ” G om ez- Z ul uaga, 527 F. 3d at349. T he I J di d notr eac h t he f irst o f th e se iss u e s. In ste a d , itre jec ted th is c laim o n th e so le b a sis th a t “th e to rtu re , if any , has t o be byt he governm entort he governm ent ’ s agent s and i ti s cl ear l y[s i c] t he governm ent ’ s agent s ar e nott he [FA R C ] . T he fa ctt hatt he governm entcan’ tcontr ol t he [F A R C ] do es n o t m ea n that the g o v ern m en t i s g o ing to torture this w o m en [sic].” (IJ D e c . a t 1 4 ) ( A .1 1 6 ). T hatw as nott he pr opers t andar d att he t i m e of the I J ’ s deci s i on, and i s nott he pr opers t andar d now . C A T pr ovi des r el i ef f r om t or tur e l i kel yt o be i nfl i ct ed, notonl yby t he governm enti t s el f, butbyot her s w i t h t he governm ent ’ s cons entoracqui es cenc e. SeeSer na- G ar ci a al s o ar gues t hatt or tur e att he hands of FA R C qual i fi es forpr ot ect i on 7 underC A T beca us e FA R C oper at es as an “a l t ernat i ve governm ent . ” She ci t es no authori t yi n sup po rtof thatcon t enti on , bu tw e l eave itt o the B IA t o ad dress i ti n the fi rs t i ns t ance i f and w hen appr opr i at e on r emand. 9 Go me z - Z u l u a g a , 5 2 7 F . 3 d a t3 4 9 - 5 0 ( c i t i n g 8 C. F . R. § 2 0 8 . 1 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) . An d , a s we r ece nt l yexpl ai ned, acqui es cenc e does notr equi r e thatt he governm enthave e ven ac tual know l edge of

t he t or tur e; i ns t ead, w i l ful bl i ndnes s w i l l s uffi ce. See i d. at350. A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l r emand fort he B I A t o appl yt he pr opers t andar d t o t hi s cl ai m . See id . at 3 5 0 -5 1 (re m a n d in g f o r a p p lica tio n o f

p ro p e r sta n d a rd w h e re IJ c o n c lu d e d m e re ly t hatt he pet i t i onerhad nots how n t hatt or tur e byFA R C w oul d occur“att he hands ” of the C o lom b ian g o v ern m en t) . 7 C . A sserted P roc ed u ral E rrors Fi nal l y , Ser na- G ar ci a ar gues t hatt hi s cas e as a w hol e s houl d be r emanded fort hr ee pr ocedur al r eas ons . A l t hough herar gum ent s r ai s e conc erns , t heydo notw arr ant i ndepende ntr el i ef. Fi r s t , Serna- G ar ci a ar gues t hatt he I J deni ed herdue pr oces s byt aki ng overherexami nat i on att he hea r i ng. I ti s t rue thatt he I J r epea t edl yt ook overSer naG a rc ia’ s e x a m in a tio n , b o th o n d ire c t an d c ro ss . S e rn a -G a rc ia, h o w e v e r, d o e s n o t cla im t hatt he I J cur t ai l ed herabi l i t yt o pr es entevi dence , cf. K ai t a v. A t t ’ yG en. , 522 F. 3d 288, 301 ( 3d C i r . 2008) , and hi s conductdi d notr i s e t o t he l evel of i nt emper ance orappar entA pos s i bl e exc ept i on conce r ns Ser na- G ar ci a’ s t es t i m onyr egar di ng m i s t r eatm entby 8 herbr ot her , butt hatt es t i m onyi s i r r el evantt o anyi s s ue on r evi ew . T he I J t ook over cr os s - exami nat i on fr om t he G overnm ent ’ s couns el t o es t abl i s h t hatSer na- G ar ci a had not m ent i oned herbr ot heratherai rpor torcr edi bl e fe ari nt ervi ew s . ( A . 174- 79. ) H e then concl uded fort hatr eas on t hathert es t i m onyr egar di ng herbr ot herw as “a r ece nt fabr i cat i on, ” and f

aul t ed herfornotcal l i ng herm ot heras a w i t nes s t o corr obor at e that t es t i m ony . ( I J . D ec. at11- 13) ( A . 113- 15) . Serna- G ar ci a, how ever , neveras s er t ed her tr ea tm en t byh er b roth er a s a b asis fo r reli ef an d , tho u g h sh e tak es issu e w ith the IJ’s a ss e ss m e n t o f

h e r te stim o n yo n th is iss u e , co n c e d e s th a t itis “ irre lev a n t an d im m a ter ial to hercl ai m bas ed upon the ki dnapi ng t hr eatfr om FA R C [. ] ” M or eover , t he I J ’ s deni al of h er k idn ap ing claim w as n o t bas ed o n h is cred ibil ityfin d ing reg ard ing S ern a-G arc ia’s b roth er. I n stead , h e e x p resslyfo u n d the k idn ap ing claim cre d ible, (IJ D ec . at 13 ) (A . 1 1 5 ), b u t d e n ied it so lelyf

o r th e re a so n s d isc u ss e d a b o v e . A c c o rd in g ly , w e h a v e n o o c c a sio n to r e a c h t h e I J ’ s t r e a t me n to f S e r n a - Ga r c i a ’ s t e s t i mo n ya b o u th e rb r o th e r . I f h e rc l a i ms aboutherbr ot herpr ove r el evanton r emand, the B I A s houl d addr es s t hos e i s s ues i n t he fi r s ti ns t ance . 10 par t i al i t yt hatw e have condemned i n ot hercas es , cf. Fi adj oe v. A t t ’ yG en. , 411 F. 3d 135, 1 5 4 -57 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). 8 Second, Ser na- G ar ci a ar gues t hatt he I J ’ s deci s i on r efl ect s “conf us i on” r egar di ng t he p roper asy l um st and ard becau se i tsugg est s ( w rongly ) that the ab sence o f past per s ecut i on pr ecl udes a fi ndi ng of futur e per s ecut i on. A l t hough t he I J ’ s deci s i on m i ght b e re a d to ra ise th a t su g g e stio n , (IJ. D e c . at 1 4 ) (A .1 1 6 ), an ye rro r in th a t re g a rd is h a rm les s. S e rn a -G a rc ia d id n o t cla im b e f o re th e A g e n c ya n d d o e s n o t cla im b e f o re th is C o u rt th a t sh e su f

f e re d p a st p e rse c u tio n in C o lo m b ia, a n d th a t issu e c lea rlyp layed n o ro le in th e IJ ’s ru lin g s . F in a lly , S e rn a -G a rc ia a rg u e s th a t th e B IA a b u se d its d isc re tio n in su m m a rily a f f irm in g w ith o u t ad d re ss in g h e r “ se rio u s le g a l issu e s.” A lth o u g h w e h a v e ju risd ictio n to11

r evi ew t he B I A ’ s deci s i on t o aff i r m w i t houtopi ni on, and agr ee thata more t hor ough di s cus s i on w oul d have be en pr efe r abl e, t he B I A ’ s deci s i on t o s um m ar i l yaff i r m m eans t hatt he I J ’ s deci s i on i s t hatof the A gencyforpurpos es of ourr evi ew . See Sm r i ko v. A sh cro ft, 3 8 7 F . 3 d 2 7 9 , 2 9 6 & n . 1 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). T h u s, b ec au se w e c an rev iew the IJ’s d e c isio n d ire c tly , the B IA ’s d e c isio n n o t to w rite its o w n o p in io n d o e s n o t in d e p e n d e n tly w arr antr el i ef unde rt hes e ci r cumst ance s . See i d. III . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l gr antt he pet i t i on forr evi ew t o t he ext entt hati tchal l enges t he deni al of Serna- G ar ci a’ s cl ai m s foras y l um and s t atut or yw i t hhol di ng bas ed on her cl ai m ed mem ber s hi p i n a s oci al gr oup and hercl ai m forr el i ef unde rC A T . W e w i l l deny t he r emai nderof the pet i t i on.