T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d byN i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

T he H onor abl e T hom a s S . Z i l l y , S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge ** f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on, s i tt i ng byde s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T O MO Y E MI O MO S A L E WA OD E S AN YA , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R J R ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 70662 A ge nc yN o. A 079- 274- 282 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry18, 2011

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B e f or e : K L E I N F E L D a nd G R A B E R , C i r c ui tJ udge s , a nd Z I L L Y , S e ni or ** D is tr ic t J u d g e . Th e g o v e rn me n ti n i t i a t e d r e mo v a l p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s tPe t i t i o n e rO mo y e mi O m o s a le w aO d e s a n y aa f te rs h e o v e r s ta y e dh e rv is ito rv is aw ith o u t au th o r iz a tio n . S he c onc e de d r e m ovabi l i tybutappl i e d f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd 

# FI LED MA R 21 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

p r o te c tio n u n d e rth e C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rtu r e ( " C A T " ) . T h e B I A d e n ie da ll f orm s of r e l i e f . W e r e vi e w the B I A ’ s rul i ngs of l a w de novo a nd i t s f

i ndi ngs of f a c t f o rs u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . C o rte z - P in e d av . H o ld e r , 6 1 0 F .3 d1 1 1 8 , 1 1 2 1 ( 9 th C i r. 20 10 ). 1. O n the a s y l um c l a i m , P e t i t i one rs uf f e r e d pa s tpe r s e c ut i on i n the f orm of effo rt s t o fo rce h er t o u n d erg o fem al e g en i t al m u t i l at i o n (F G M ), an dsh e h as a w el l -fo u n d ed fear o f fu tu re p ersecu t i o n o n th e sam e g ro u n d . F G M q u al i fi es as a form of pers ec ut i on . M oh am m ed v. G on za l es , 40 0 F . 3d 78 5, 79 4– 95 (9th C i r. 2005) . T he r e c or d c om pe l s af i ndi ng tha tthe N i ge r i a n gove rnm e ntc oul d notor w o u ldn o t c o n tr o l th e a tte m p ts b yP e titio n e r ’s in - la w s to m u tila te h e rf o r c ib lyin th e p a s t a n d th a t s h e f

a c e s ar e a s o n ab le p o s s ib ilityo f th e irf u tu r e e f f o rts to m u tila te h e r . V io le n c e in f

lic te d b yf

a m ilym e m b e r s c a n e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf o ra s y lu m in th is circ u m stan ce . S ee F aru kv . A sh cr o ft, 3 7 8 F .3 d9 4 0 , 9 4 3 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 4 ) ( "[ I]f the gove rnm e nti s unabl e orunw i l l i ng t o c ontr ol pe r s e c ut i on, i tm a tt e r s notw ho i nf l i c t s i t . " ) . T he B I A ’ s c onc l us i on tha tthe gove rnm e ntm e ti t s bur de n t o pr ove tha ti nt e rna l r e l oc a t i on w i thi n N i ge r i aw oul d be " r e a s onabl e " w i th r e s pe c tt o the F G M cl ai m i s n o tsu p p o rt ed b y su b st an t i al ev i d en ce i n v i ew o f th e i n -l aw s’ r e l e n t l e s s p u r s u i to f

Pe t i t i o n e rw h e r e v e rs h e h a s g o n e . Se e 8 C. F. R. § 1208. 13( b) ( 3) ( pr ovi di ng tha tthe gove rnm e ntbe a r s the bur de n of r e butt i ng a3

p resu m p t i o n th atrel o cat i o n i s u n reaso n ab l e w h en an asyl u m seek er p ro v es p ast pe r s e c ut i on, a nd r e qui r i ng a dj udi c a t or s t o c ons i de r" a l l the c i r c um s t a nc e s of the ca se ") . W e there fore grantthe pet i t i on and rem and t o the B IA for the A tt orney G e ne r a l t o e xe r c i s e hi s di s c r e t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1158( b) w he the rt o gr a nt Pe t i t i o n e ra s y l u m. 2. P et i t i on eral so suff

er ed pastpers ec ut i on on ac coun tof her C hri st i an re l i gi on . B utthe B IA ’ s f i nd i ng thati nt ernal re l ocat i on w ou l d b e " re as on abl e" prot ec t i on agai nstthi s f orm of future per se cut i on i s s up po rt ed by subst ant i al evi dence. 3 . W ith r e s p e c t to w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l, th e B I A im p r o p e r lyr e f u s e dto c ons i de rthe e vi de nc e of abus e i nf

l i c t e d byP e t i t i one r ’ s i n- l a w s . S e e F a ruk, 378 F . 3 d at9 4 3 (h o l d i n g th atv i o l en ce i n fl i ct ed b y fam i l y m em b ers can est ab l i sh e lig ib ilityf

o rr e lie f ) . W e th e r e f

o r e g r a n t th e p e titio n o n th is c la im a n dr e m a n dto the B I A f

orr e c ons i de r a t i on unde rthe pr ope rl e ga l s t a nda r d. 4. S ub st ant i al evi dence s up po rt s the deni al of C A T re l i ef . T he re cord do es n o t c o m p e l ac o n c lu s io n th a t P e titio n e rm o r e lik e lyth a n n o t w o u ldf a c e to rtu r e if re turned t o N i geri a. G R A N T E D i n pa rt ; D E N I E D i n pa rt ; R E M A N D E D . P e t i t i one rs ha l l be a w a r d e d c o s ts o n ap p e a l.