2006 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 5-16-2006 

# F e rn ando v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-1022

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2006

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd 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 l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2006 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

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

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" F e r n a ndo v

. Atty Ge n U SA" (2006). 2006 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1104. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2006/1104T he H onor abl e A r t hurL . A l ar cón, Seni orJ udge, U ni t ed * St at es C our tof A ppeal s fort he N inth C i r cui t , s i t t i ng by des i gnat i on. NOT 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. 03- 1022
WARNKU L A S OOR I YA AUG US T I NE F E RN ANDO, 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 Fi l e N o. A 70- 650- 606

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

A pr i l 24, 2006
B efore: F U E N T E S , S T A P L E T O N , and A L A R C Ó N , C i rcui tJudg es. * ( Fi l ed: M ay16, 2006)2 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

FU E N T E S, C i r cui tJ udge. W arnkul a S. A ugus t i ne Fer nando pet i t i ons for r evi ew of a deci s i on by t he B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( t he “B I A ”) di s m i s s i ng hi s appea l of an I m m i gr at i on J udge’ s deni al of hi s appl i cat i on foras y l um and w i t hhol di ng of r emoval
. B eca us e s ub stan ti al evi dence
s uppor t s t he dec i s i on of the B oar d, w e ar e compel l ed t o denyFer nando’ s pet i t i on, r ender i ng him i m m ediat el yrem ov able fr om t he U nit ed S t at es. I . Backg r ound B eca us e w e w r i t e onl yforpar t i es w ho ar e w el l ver s ed i n t he par t i cul ar s , w e pr ovi de
o n ly c u rso ry b a c k g ro u n d
. F e rn a n d o is a fif ty -f o u r-y e a r-o ld n a tiv e o f

S ri L a n k a a n d a n e th n ic T ami l
. H e ent er ed t he U ni t ed St at es w i t houtpr operdocument at i on i n orar ound M ar ch of 1 9 9 0
. A s a r es ul t , overs even y ear s l at er , i n O ct oberof 1997, Fer nando w as s erved w i t h a N ot i ce t o A ppearchar gi ng h im w it h r emovabi l i t ypur s uantt o § 237( a) ( 1) ( A ) of the I m m i gr at i on and N at i onal i t y A ct , 8 U
. S. C
. § 1227( a) ( 1) ( A )
. B efor e an i m m i gr at i on j udge (th e “ IJ” ) o n M a y7 , 1 9 9 8 , F e rn a n d o c o n c e d e d th e c h a rg e s in th e N o tice to A p p e a r a s to h is i l l egal entr y , butr eques t ed as y l um , w i t hhol di ng of deport at i on or , i n t he al t ernat i ve, t he oppor tuni t yt o departt he U ni t ed St at es vol unt ar i l y . Fer nan d o su b m i t t ed an i ni t i al as y l um appl i cat i on on O ct ober 21, 1997, cl ai m i ng he w as an act i ve m ember i n a r es ist an ce g roup3

cal l ed the Li ber at i on T i ger s of Tam i l E el am. H e s t at ed thatas a mem berof thatgr oup he had been a r r es t ed and abus ed by governm ent offi ci al s and t hat i f re tur ned t o Sr i L anka, he fe ar ed he w oul d be arr es t ed orki l l ed. Fer nando subm i t t ed a s econd appl i cat i on on A ugus t 21, 1998. I n t hatappl i cat i on Fer nando des cr i bed var i ous arrest s , beat i ngs and ac t s of t or tur e by governm entauthor i t i es . H ow ever , contr ary t o hi s i ni t i al as y l um appl i cat i on, he s t at ed that he knew not hi ng of the Li ber at i on T i ger s and w as unaw are o f anym ember s of that
o rg a n iza tio n . H a v in g r e c e iv e d c o p ies o f b o th a p p lica tio n s, th e IJ h a d tw o se p a ra te appl i cat i ons befor e hi m at t he t i m e of Fer nando’ s m er i t s hear i ng, w hi ch bega n on A ugus t18, 1 9 9 8 an d en d ed three d ay s lat er. A t t he c o n c l u s i o n o f

t h e h e a r i n g , t h e I J f

o u n d t h a tFe r n a n d o h a d f a i l e d t o p r o v i de
cre d ible ev iden ce in su p p o rto f h is ap p lic a tio n s fo r asy lum , w ith h o lding o r vo lun tary d e p a rtu re . F e rn a n d o a p p e a led to th e B IA , w h ich , a s p re v io u sly n o ted , d ism iss e d h is a p p e a l. Fer nando i s here ap p ea li ng t hatdi s m i s s al byt he B I A
. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 8 U . S
. C
. § 2 4 2 (a)(1) a n d rev iew o n lythe B IA ’s , an d n o t th e IJ’s, dec isi o n . S ee L i v. A tt ’y G en . , 4 0 0 F . 3 d 1 5 7 , 1 6 2 (3d C ir
. 2 0 0 5 ). II . A n a ly sis A s a p reli m inarym att er w e n o te th at F ern an d o ’s f ir st argu m en t–as serti n g that the B IA
e rre d in f a ili n g to c o n sid e r o n e o f h is m o tio n s– h a s a lre a d yb e e n a d d re ss e d , as th e m o tio n in q u e stio n w a s c o n sid e re d a n d ru led u p o n b yth e B I A d u r in g th e p e n d e n c yo f th is a p p e a l. Fer nando’ s fi r s tpoi nton appea l i s t hus m oot , and w e nee d notaddr es s i ther e.4

W e a lso n e e d n o t ad d re ss F e rn a n d o ’s s e c o n d a rg u m e n t, th a t w e sh o u ld re m a n d th is
cas e forfur t herpr ocee di ngs beca us e the B I A and I J fai l ed t o cons i der hi s cl ai m foras y l um bas ed on the Sr i L ankan gove r nm ent ’ s “patt ern and pra ct i ce” of per s ecut i ng T ami l s . See 8 C FR § 208. 13( b) ( 2) ( i )
. T hi s i s s ue w as notbr i efe d orargue d befor e the B I A
. T hough Fer nando di d m ent i on i n hi s br i ef t o t he B I A t hat he m i ght be el i gi bl e foras y l um bas ed on
o p in io n s im p u ted to h im b yth e S ri L a n k a n g o v e rn m e n t irre sp e c tiv e o f th e c re d ib ili tyo f

h is t es t i m onybefor e the I J , he fa i l ed t o i nvoke Sect i on 208. 13( b) ( 2) ( I )
. B eca us e w e mayr evi ew Fer nando’ s appl i cat i on onl yt o t he ext enthe has ex h au sted al l avai l abl e admi ni s t r at i ve
r emedi es , 8 U
. S. C
. § 1252( d) ( 1) , Fer nando’ s fai l ur e t o as s er thi s cl ai m under Sect i on 208. 13( b) ( 2) ( I ) befor e the B I A r ender s thatcl ai m nonj us t i ci abl e byt hi s C our ton
a p p e a l. S e e A lley n e v . U .S . IN S , 8 7 9 F .2 d 1 1 7 7 , 1 1 8 2 (3 d C ir. 1 9 8 9 ) (n o tin g th a t th e sta tu te t hateventual l ybeca m e 8 U
. S. C
. § 1252 “bar s cons i der at i on of par t i cul arques t i ons notr ai s ed in an ap p ea l t o the B o ard ”). F ern an d o n e x t a rg u es th at t h e IJ’s d en ial o f h is ap p li ca ti o n fo r vo lun taryd ep arture d ep ri v ed h im o f h is c o n sti tuti o n al righ t to a f u ll an d fa irh ea ri n g . U n d er 8 U . S
. C
. § 1 2 2 9 C (f), “[n] o cour ts hal l have j ur i s di ct i on overan appea l f r om deni al of a r eques tforan or derof vol unt arydepartur e unders ubs ect i on ( b) , ” w hi ch re l at es t o gr ant s or deni al of r eques t s for vol unt arydepartur e byi m m i gr at i on j udges
. O f cour s e w e do have j ur i s di ct i on overdeci s i ons
o f th e IJ th a t am o u n t to th e d e n ial o f a c o n stitu tio n a l rig h t. In th is c a se , the IJ e x e rc ise d h is di s cr et i on not t o perm i t vol unt ary departur e on t he ground t hat Fer nando’ s appl i cat i on w as5

n o t m ad e in g o o d fa ith an d that h is t esti m o n ylack ed cre d ibil ity . C o n tr aryto F ern an d o ’s
as s er t i on, s uch an e xer ci s e of the IJ ’ s di s cr et i on does notr i s e t o t he l evel of a c ons t i tut i onal vi ol at i on ; it i s t her efor e notr evi ew abl e byt hi s C our t . A ccor di ngl y , w e ca nnotgr ant F e r n a n d o r e l i e f

a s t o t h i s c l a i m. Fi nal l y , as t o t he i s s ue att he h ea rt of thi s m at t er , w hethers ubs t ant i al evi dence
su p p o rt s the B IA ’s dism issal, w e a lso c an n o t gran t Fe rna n d o reli ef
. A s n o ted, th e IJ’s
o p in io n a n d B IA ’s d ism iss a l w e re b a se d lar g e ly u p o n th e f o rm e r’s a d v e r s e c r e d ib ili ty det er m i nat i on as t o Fer nando. W e r evi ew adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet erm i nat i ons fors ubs t ant i al evi dence
. G ao v. A s hcr oft , 299 F. 3d 266, 272 ( 3d C i r . 2002)
. T hough Fer nando’ s narr at i ve
r el at i ng t o t he per s ecut i on t o w hi ch he w as s ubj ecti n Sr i L anka w as notpar t i cul ar l ydr aw noutorconvol ut ed, t her e w er e nonethel es s gl ar i ng i ncons i s t enci es among hi s t w o as y l um appl i cat i ons and hi s t es t i m onybefor e the I J . Forexampl e, w her eas i n h is f ir s tappl i cat i on Fer nando pr ofes s ed mem ber s hi p i n t he T ami l T i ger s , a Sr i L ankan r ebel gr oup oft en atodds wi t h t h e g o v e r n me n t , i n h i s s e c o n d a n d i n h i s o r a l t e s t i mo n yh e ma d e n o s u c h c l a i m. Fer nando fur t her under m i ned hi s cr edi bi l i t y w hen he s t at ed i n hi s t es t i m onybefor e the I J t hat not hi ng happene d t o hi s bodyw hi l e he w as bei ng det ai ned i n J une orJ ul yof 1998, a di r ect contr adi ct i on of hi s w r i t t en appl i cat i on, w hi ch i ndi cat es t hathe w as phy s i cal l yt or tur ed d u ri n g this pe ri o d
. B ec au se th ese inco n sist en cies a re n o t m ino r, b u t rathe r g et to the “ h ea rt of the as y l um cl ai m , ” I d. , w e hol d t h at s ubs t ant i al evi dence s uppor t s t he conc l us i on t hat Fer nando’ s t es t i m onyw as notcr edi bl e. W e ther efor e af fi r m t he B I A ’ s di s m i s s al of F e rn a n d o ’s c laim s a s to th is p o in t.6

I I I C oncl usi on F o r th e rea so n s stat ed ab o v e, w e d en y F ern an d o ’s p eti ti o n fo r rev iew
. W e the ref o re
or derhi m r emoved fr om t he U ni t ed St at es t o hi s nat i ve Sr i L anka.