FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT A pr i l18, 2007 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. 06- 14943 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N os . A 98- 602- 627 & A 98- 602- 628 K E Y L I Z A N N A B E R T I , G R E G O R Y A L E X A N D E R M O R E N O , V I A N N A J U L I E T T M O R R E L L , P e titio n e r s , 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

_________________________ ( A p r i l18, 2007) B efo re D U B IN A , C A RN E S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: K e y l i z A nnaB e rt i , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of V e ne z ue l a , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of2

the de c i s i on of

the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s tha ta f f i rm e d the de c i s i on of

the I m m i gr a t i on J udge tha tde ni e d he ra s y l um , 8 U . S . C . § 1158( a ) ( 1) ; w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , 8 U . S . C . § 1231( b) ( 3) ; a nd r e l i e f unde rthe U ni t e d N a t i ons C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e . B e rt i a r gue s tha ts ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e doe s nots upportthe a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyf

i ndi ng of the I J ; bi a s e xhi bi t e d bythe I Jde ni e d B e rt i af ul l a nd f a i ropportuni tyt o pr e s e nthe rc l a i m s ; a nd s he s a t i s f i e d the r e qui r e m e nt s f

or a s y lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l, a n d r e lie f

u n d e rth e C A T . T h e s e a r g u m e n ts f a il. B e rt i c ha l l e nge d be f

or e the B I A ne i the rthe a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyf i ndi ng nor the f a i rne s s of

he rhe a r i ng. W he n a n appl i c a ntf a i l s t o r a i s e a n i s s ue be f or e the B I A , s h e h a s n o t e x h au s te d h e ra d m in is tr a tiv e r e m e d ie s , a n d w e la c kju r is d ic tio n to e nt e rt a i n the i s s ue . A m a y a - A rtundua gav. U . S . A tt ’ yG e n. , 463 F . 3d 1247, 1251 ( 11th C i r . 2006) . W e a r e unabl e t o di s turb the a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyf i ndi ng or c ons i de rthe f

a i rne s s of

B e rt i ’ s he a r i ng. Iti s w el l -s ett l ed thatan advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on al on e m aysupp ort a deni al of re l i ef

. S ee F orgu e v. U . S . A tt ’ y G en. , 40 1 F . 3d 12 82 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ) . B e rti e n te r e d th e U n ite d S ta te s o n J a n u a ry6 , 1 9 9 9 , a n d m a in ta in s th a t in 19 98 she w as pers ec ut ed on ac coun tof her pol i t i ca l op i ni on by the B ol i vari an C i rc l es , a group sy m pathet i c t o V enez uel an P re si dentH ug o C havez. T he IJbase d the adverse cr edi bi l i ty f i nd i ng on , am on g o ther thi ng s, the fa ctthata U ni t ed S t at es C itiz e n s h ip a n d I m m ig r a tio n S e rv ic e s r e p o rt s ta te s th a t th e B o liv a r ia n C ir c le s d id3

n o t c o m e in to e x is te n c e u n til 2 0 0 1 . I n B e rti’s c a s e , th e a d v e r s e c r e d ib ility d e te rm in a tio n is s u f

f ic ie n t to s u p p o rt th e d e n ia l o f a s y lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l, a n d r e lie f

u n d e rth e C A T . DE NI E D.