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. 09- 1734

___________ T AT YANA P OL E T AYE VA; UM ES H KU M AR,

P eti ti o n ers v . A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES, R e s p o n d e n t

___________________________________ 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 ( A gencyN os . A 096- 264- 917 and A 096- 264- 918) Im m i grat i on Judg e: E ug ene P ug l i ese

____________________________________ Subm i tt ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 1, 2010 B efor e: B A R R Y , ST A PL E T O N and N Y G A A R D , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: A pr i l 2, 2010)

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM L ead Pet i t i onerT aty ana Pol et ay eva i s a nat i ve of the form erSovi etU ni on and a ci t i zen of

U zbeki s t an. H erhus band, der i vat i ve- Pet i t i onerU m es h K um ar , i s a nat i ve and2

c i t i z e n o f

I n d i a . Th e ye n t e r e d th e Un i t e d S t a t e s i n J u n e 2 0 0 2 a n d o v e r s t a y e d th e t i me per i od perm i tt ed bythei rvi s as . A ft erbei ng i s s ued a N ot i ce t o A ppeari n A pr i l 2003, Pol et ay eva s oughtas y l um , w i thhol di ng of r emoval , and r el i ef unde rthe C onvent i on A gai ns tT ortur e ( C A T ) . Pol et ay eva’ s appl i cat i ons w er e bas ed on herfea rof per s ecut i on and t or tur e i n U zbeki s t an on ac countof herR us s i an nat i onal i tyand R us s i an O r thodox re lig io n . L ik e th e Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e (IJ ) b e f o re it, th e B o a rd o f

Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( B I A ) found thatPol et ay eva f ai l ed t o carryherbur den of pr oof as t o eac h appl i cat i on for r el i ef. B eca us e the B I A ’ s deci s i on i s s upport ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence , w e w i l l deny P o le ta y e v a ’s p e titio n f

o r r e v ie w . I. A ta hea r i ng befor e the I J , Pol et ay eva t es t i fi ed thats he w as born i n U zbeki s t an, and thatboth herhus band and daught erw er e born i n I ndi a. T he daught ercurr ent l yr es i des i n U zbeki s t an w i th Pol et ay eva’ s par ent s . Pol et ay eva ha d notal w ay s r es i ded i n U zbeki s t an p rio r to e n ter in g th e U n ited S tate s in Ju n e 2 0 0 2 . S h e liv e d in In d ia f o r a p p ro x im a tely ei ghtm onths , s t art i ng i n N ovember1995, and i n the U ni t ed St at es forar ound fi ve mont hs i n 2 0 0 1 . P o l e t a ye v a r e tu rn e d t o U z b e k i s t a n a f t e re a c h p e r i o d o f

t e m p o r a ry r e s i d e n c y. P o leta y e v a tes tifie d th a t sin c e c h ild h o o d sh e h a d b e e n m istre a ted b ye th n ic U zbeks . I n gr ade s chool , s peci fi cal l y : s he w as hi tw i th r ocks and s pi ton; hers chool uni form w as t orn; and s he w as cal l ed unpl eas antnames a nd thr eat ened. She des cr i bed one i nci dentthatoccurr ed y ear s l at erw hen an e l der l yU zbek w om an y el l ed atherand then3

r i pped a c r os s fr om herneckl ace , aft erw hi ch a c r ow d of otherU zbeks att acke d her . A ft er hi gh s chool , Pol et ay eva w orked as a nur s e, and then as the pr opr i et orand di r ect orof an E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e s c h o o l . P o l e t a ye v a d e s c r i b e d a n o th e ri n c i d e n tw h e n s h e w a s b e a t e n b y a gr oup of U zbeks aft ers he r efus ed t o tr ans ferow ner s hi p of hers chool t o an U zbek w om an named I l ga U r agas hava. M onths l at er , Pol et ay eva’ s daught erw as ki dnapped by U r agas hava a nd hercohort s forl ever age i n acqui r i ng ow ner s hi p of the s chool . Pol et ay eva acqui es ced a nd s i gned overherow ner s hi p i nt er es ti n the s chool i n or derforherdaught er to b e re le a s e d f

ro m c a p tiv ity. Pol et ay eva’ s hus band br i efl yt es t i fi ed as w el l . H e des cr i bed an i nci dentw hen he and Pol et ay eva w er e bea t en bypol i ce of fi cer s . H e t es t i fi ed t o the bi gotryi n U zbeki s t an and I ndi a w i th r egar d t o i nt err aci al coupl es . A tthe cl os e of the hea r i ng, the I J m ade a n adver s e cr edi bi l i tydet erm i nat i on, and found thatthe evi dence pr es ent ed byPol et ay eva d id n o t s u p p o rta f

in d in g o f p a s t o r f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n o r t o rtu re . T he B IA dis m i ssed Po l et ay eva’s appeal. T he B IA did not adop tthe IJ’ s adverse cr edi bi l i tydet erm i nat i on. I tnonethel es s found thatPol et ay eva f ai l ed t o carryherbur den of pr oof foras y l um , w i thhol di ng of r emoval , and C A T r el i ef. T he B I A found thatthe al l eged “ phy s i cal as s aul tand verbal thr eat s . . . bythemsel ves , do notr i s e t o the l evel of p e rse c u tio n .” T h e B IA f o u n d th a t alth o u g h P o leta y e v a ’s “ d a u g h terw a s a lleg e d ly ki dnaped [ s i c] i n 2002 . . . thi s appea r s t o be partof a s cheme t o t ake ove rthe s chool o w n ed b y[P eti ti o n ers] an d n o t on ac co u n t of a g rou n d p rotec ted u n d er the A ct. ” T h e B IA4

al s o found thatPol et ay eva’ s r eturn tr i ps t o U zbeki s t an fr om both the U ni t ed St at es and Ind ia ca st do u b t on h er a ll eg ed fe ar o f f u ture p erse cu ti o n . T h e B IA rejected P o let ay ev a’s c laim th a t th e re e x ists a p a ttern o r p ra c tice o f p e rse c u tio n a g a in st R u ss ian C h ristia n s in U z b e k ista n . F in a lly , the B IA f o u n d th a t P o leta y e v a h a d f a iled to e sta b lish th a t sh e w o u ld lik e ly b e to rtu re d u p o n re m o v a l to U z b e k is ta n . P o le ta y e v a a p p e a le d . II. W e have j ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew a fi nal or derof r emoval under8 U . S. C . § 1252. See B ri sen o -F lores v . A tt ’yG en . , 4 9 2 F . 3 d 2 2 6 , 2 2 8 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 7 ). “W h ere the B IA ren d ers it s o w n d ec isi o n an d d o es n o t m ere lyad o p t th e o p inion o f th e IJ, w e re v iew the B IA ’s d e c is io n , n o t th a t o f

th e IJ .” W o n g v . A tt’ yG e n ., 5 3 9 F .3 d 2 2 5 , 2 3 0 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 8 ). W e r evi ew the B I A ’ s fi ndi ngs fors ubs t ant i al evi dence , uphol di ng them “unl es s any re a s o n a b le a d

ju d ic a to r w o u ld b e c o m p e lle d to c o n c lu d e to th e c o n tr a ry.” 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 (b)(4 )(B ); see also D ia v. A sh cro ft, 3 5 3 F . 3 d 2 2 8 , 2 4 9 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) (en b an c). III . O n appea l , Pol et ay eva de vot es a s ubs t ant i al port i on of herbr i ef t o chal l engi ng the IJ’ s a d v e rse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n . T h is is a n e x e rc ise in f u til ity , as w e a re o n ly rev iew ing the d ec isi o n o f th e B IA , an d the B IA h as a lr ea d yd eterm ined that the IJ’s ad v erse cre d ibil ityd eterm ination w as e rron eo u s. T h e B IA ac ce p ted P o let ay ev a’s t es t i m onyas cr edi bl e, butnonethel es s found i t , al ong w i th the r es tof the evi dence pr es ent ed, t o be i ns uffi ci entform eet i ng Pol et ay eva’ s bur dens of pr oof. Forthe r eas onsSubst ant i al evi dence al s o s uppor t s the B I A ’ s fi ndi ng thata pr ot ect ed gr ound w as not 1 “atl eas tone ce ntr al r eas on, ” 8 U . S. C . § 1158( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i ) , forthe ki dnappi ng of Pol et ay eva’ s daught er . C f. A m anfi v. A s hcr oft , 328 F. 3d 719, 727 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( not i ng that “the m ere exi st ence o f a ge neral i zed m oti ve u nd erl y i ng persecut i on cann ot es t abli sh th e p ro p o s itio n th a t th e a lie n f e a rs p e rs e c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f th a t m o tiv e .” ). 5 d e s c ri b e d b e lo w , w e f

in d th e B IA ’s c o n c lu s io n s to b e s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . T he r andom phy s i cal as s aul t s , har as s m ent , and di s cr i m i nat i on s uffe r ed by Pol et ay eva a r e notact s s uffi ci ent l ys ever e t o cons t i tut e pas tper s ecut i on on acc ountof a pr ot ect ed gr ound. See A hm ed v. A s hcr oft , 341 F. 3d 214, 217 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( “per s ecut i on c o n n o tes e x tre m e b e h a v io r, in c lu d in g ‘th re a ts to life , co n f in e m e n t, t o rtu re , an d e c o n o m ic r es tr i ct i ons s o s ever e thattheycons t i tut e a thr eatt o l i fe orfr eedom’ ”) ( quot at i on om i t t ed). N or has Po l et ay eva d em on strat ed a p at t ern or pract i ce of persecut i on against 1 C hr i s t i ans , R us s i an O r thodox obs erver s , oreven non- M us l i m s i n gener al . M or eover , and as emphasi zed bythe B I A , Pol et ay eva’ s r eturns t o U zbeki s t an fr om both the U ni t ed St at es and I ndi a s er i ous l yunderm i ne heral l eged w el l - founded f earof per s ecut i on. See 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .8 (b ) (in d ica tin g th a t an a p p lica n t w h o lea v e s th e U n ited S tate s a n d re tu rn s to the countryof cl ai m ed per s ecut i on i s pr es um ed t o have abandoned he rappl i cat i on, abs ent co m p ell ing rea so n s); see also T o loza -Ji m en ez v . G o n za les, 4 5 7 F . 3 d 1 5 5 , 1 6 1 (1st C ir . 2006) ( hol di ng thatthe fa ctthatT ol oza “ tr avel ed tw i ce t o the U ni t ed St at es . . . and y et s he r eturned t o C ol om bi a ea ch t i m e, s tr ongl yi ndi cat [ed] thats he has no fea rof p e rs e c u tio n .” ). B ecaus e s ubs t ant i al evi dence s upport s the B I A ’ s r ej ect i on of Pol et ay eva’ s as y l umcl ai m , the s ame can be s ai d fori t s r ej ect i on of Pol et ay eva’ s cl ai m forw i thhol di ng of

r emoval . See G uo v. A s hcr oft , 386 F. 3d 556, 561 n. 4 ( 3d C i r . 2004) ( not i ng that“an appl i cantw ho does notqual i fyforas y l um al s o does notqual i fyforw i thhol di ng of r emoval . ”) . W i th r egar d t o Pol et ay eva’ s C A T cl ai m , “[a ] n appl i cantforr el i ef on the m er i t s under[A r t i cl e 3 of] the C onvent i on A gai ns tT ortur e bea r s the bur den of e sta b lish in g th a t itis m o re lik e lyth a n n o t th a t h e o r sh e w o u ld b e to rtu re d if re m o v e d to the p rop o sed co u n tryo f re m o v al. ” S il v a-R en g ifo v . A tt ’yG en . , 4 7 3 F . 3 d 5 8 , 6 4 (3d C ir . 2007) ( quot at i ons om i tt ed) . Pol et ay eva ha s fai l ed t o demonstr at e thats he w as i nt ent i onal l yi nfl i ct ed w i th s ever e pai n ors uffe r i ng i n U zbeki s t an. Fur therm or e, s he has negl ect ed t o poi ntt o anyevi dence i n the r ecor d t o demonstr at e thatthe pr os pectof s uch harm i s l i kel yi f s he i s r emoved fr om the U ni t ed St at es . T her efor e, s ubs t ant i al evi dence s u p p o rt s th e B IA ’s f

in d in g th a t P o le ta y e v a h a s n o t e s ta b lis h e d e n title m e n t to C A T re lie f. Ac c o r d i n g l y , we wi l l d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w.

6