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 2-13-2006 

# Lim 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 . 05-1077

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_2006

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 2006 D e c i sion s b y an authori 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 " L im v . Atty Ge n U SA" (2006). 2006 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1595. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2006/1595NOT 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. 05- 1077

___________ ME R R Y L I M, 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 e sp o n d e n t

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof T h e B o a rd o f

Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( B I A N o. A 95- 146- 859) I m m i gr at i on J udge: R os al i nd K . M al l oy

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o L A R 34. 1( a)

J anuary9, 2006

____________________________________H o n o r a b l eD i c ki n s o nR . D eb e v o i s e , S e n i o r D i s tri c tJu dg ef

o r th eD i s tri c to f

N e wJ e r s e y, * sitti ngby designation. Ms. L im moved for a sta y of removal and for

a stay of the voluntary

depar ture period. 1 The motion for a

stay of removal was grante d. The motion for a stay of the voluntary

depar ture peri od wa s re ferre d tothemeri ts p ane l. Wec on c ludethat th is c ourt do e s n ot h avejurisdic tio n to extend or reinstate or

stay the voluntary

depar ture period, and c onsequently dismiss the motion. Rey noso-L opez v. Ashcrof

t, 369 F.3d 275, 283-4 ( 3d Cir. 2004).

2 B efor e: B A R R Y and A M B R O , C i r cui tJ udges , and D E B E V O I SE , Seni orD i s tr i ctJ udge * ( Fi l ed: February13, 2006)

____________________________________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________________________________ D E B E V O I SE , Seni orD i s tr i ctJ udge Pet i t i oner , M err ySal i m L i m , s eeks r evi ew of a de ci s i on of the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “the B I A ”) aff i r m i ng w i thoutopi ni on the dec i s i on of the I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “the I J ”) thatdeni ed herappl i cat i on foras y l um , w i thhol di ng of r emoval and r el i ef unde rA r t i cl e 3 of the U ni t ed N at i ons C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e and O therC i vi l , I nhum an orD egr adi ng T r eatm entorPuni s hm ent( “the C A T ”) . 1 W e ho l d thatthe IJ erred, ov erl oo king cri t i cal evidence, w hen she fo un d thatM s. L i m fai l ed t o es t abl i s h pas tper s ecut i on and fe arof futur e per s ecut i on. W e w i l l r emand the ca s e forfur therpr ocee di ngs i n acc or dance w i th thi s opi ni on.3 I . F act s and P roce dural H i s t ory T he I J found no r eas on t o doubtM s . L i m ’ s cr edi bi l i ty , and cons equent l yr el i ance m aybe had upon he rr eci t al of eve nt s cont ai ned i n hert es t i m ony , heras y l um appl i cat i on, an d h er sw o rn statem en t, su p p lem en ted b ythe U n it ed S tat es D ep artm en t of S tat e C o u n try R ep o rt s o n H u m an R igh ts Pra cti ce s - Ind o n esia, 20 0 0 , 2 0 0 1 an d 2 0 0 2 (“the C o u n try R ep o rt s”). T he C ountyR eport s des cr i be r aci al and r el i gi ous t ens i ons i n I ndones i a. I n 1965 the nat i onw i de s oci al unr es tr es ul t ed i n as s aul t s upon C hi nes e peopl e gene r al l y , ki l l i ngs o f C h in e se p e o p le a n d b u rn in g o f C h in e se h o u se s. In 1 9 9 8 ra c ial rio ts e ru p ted , an d a g a in C h in e se p e o p le a n d b u sin e ss e s w e re a ttac k e d . A s d e sc rib e d in th e 2 0 0 1 C o u n tryR e p o rt: “Et hni c C hi nes e, w ho r epr es entappr oxi m at el y3 per centof the popul at i on - byfarthe l ar ges tnoni ndi genous m i nor i tygr oup - hi s t or i cal l yhave pl ay ed a maj orr ol e i n the economy . I n 1998 ant i - C hi nes e s ent i m entl ed t o s er i ous and w i des pr ead a t t acks on C hi nes e- ow ned bus i nes s es . D es pi t e the W ahi d G overnm ent ’ s comm i t m entt o r eopen the i nves t i gat i on i nt o t hes e att acks , the M egaw at i governm enthas fai l ed t o pur s ue the 1999 re c o m m e n d a tio n s o f

th e jo in t f

a c t-f in d in g tea m (T G P F ) th a t w a s c o m m iss io n e d to i nves t i gat e the 1998 att acks . ” M s. L im tes tifie d a s f

o llo w s. S h e is a n e th n ic C h in e se w o m a n , w a s b o rn in M e d a n , In d o n e s ia in 1 9 5 7 . S h e is a P e n te c o s ta l C h ri s tia n , b a p tiz e d a t a g e e ig h te e n . I ndones i a has been the s cene of r el i gi ous and ethni c vi ol ence i nfl i ct ed bym ember s of the4

M u slim m a

jo rityu p o n th e lar g e lyC h ristia n C h in e se m in o rity . F ro m e a rlyc h ild h o o d u n til herdepartur e forthe U ni t ed St at es i n 2002, M s . L i m has encount er ed thi s vi ol ence , i n f l i c t e d u p o n h e ra tl e a s ti n p a r tb e c a u s e o f h e rC h i n e s e a n d / o rC h r i s t i a n i d e n t i ty. I n 1965, w hen M s . L i m w as s even y ear s of age , the ac t i vi t i es of the I ndones i an C om m uni s tPar tycaus ed nat i onw i de unr es t , forw hi ch the governm entand the I ndones i an peo ple atl arge bl am ed thei r C hinese ci t i zens. M ob s at t acked pri ncipal l yC hinese t arget s, burni ng thei rhom es and ki l l i ng them. M s . L i m ’ s m otherhi d M s . L i m and herthr ee s i s t er s undera bed w hen thei rhous e w as t ar get ed bypeopl e y el l i ng “K i l l C hi nes e” a nd throw i ng st on es. T hr oughoutherchi l dhood M s . L i m w as har as s ed bynat i ve I ndones i ans on herw ay t o s chool orw hen otherw i s e on the s tr eet . She w as cur s ed w i th r el i gi ous s l ur s s uch as “C h ink co m m u n ist , ” “ C h ri sti an K af ir ” (a theist) an d “H ara n ” (reli g iou slyco n d em n ed ). I n 1976 M s . L i m gr aduat ed fr om hi gh s chool and mar r i ed an e thni c C hi nes e and C hr i s t i an. T heym oved t o hi s hom et ow n, Padang, and s oughtt o open a bus i nes s . Padang w a s a p re d o m in a n tlyM u slim c ity , an d a f ter a y e a r M s. L im a n d h e r h u sb a n d re tu rn e d to M edan , w here he co nd ucted a cl othi ng bu si ness. In 1 9 8 0 th e c o u p le m o v e d to Ja k a rta to o p e n a re sta u ra n t. T h e m a jo rityo f th e ir cus t om er s w er e C hi nes e and the r es tC hr i s t i an I ndones i ans . A l though M s . L i m and her hus band w er e nots ubj ect ed t o di r ectatt acks unt i l 1998, att acks on C hi nes e per s ons and C hi nes e C hr i s t i ans fl ar ed i n var i ous part s of I ndones i a. I n 1986 ther e occ urr ed the5

T anj ung Pr i ok i nci denti n J akart a. A n arm yoffi cerent er ed a mosque w i thoutt aki ng off h is s h o e s. It w a s u n k n o w n w h e th e r h e w a s C h in e se , b u t M u slim p e o p le e x p re ss e d th e ir o u tr ag e a g ains t C h ines e p eo p le, assa u lt ing them , b u rnin g h o u ses a n d loo ti n g sh o p s. In 1 9 9 4 re lig io u s c o n f

licts e ru p ted in E a st J a v a , rais in g ten sio n s in o th e r a re a s. In 1 9 9 6 in th e C ityo f

S id o a rjo a m in iste r a n d h is f a m ilyw e re b u rn e d a liv e w h e n a m o b se t th e ir c h u rc h a b laz e . A lso in 1 9 9 6 M s. L im a n d h e r h u sb a n d m a d e th e f irst o f th re e trip s to Si ngapor e t o expl or e w hethertheycoul d m ove ther e and e s t abl i s h a bus i nes s . T hey d e te rm in e d th a t th e yla c k e d s u f f ic ie n t f u n d s to m a k e th a t m o v e . I n 1997 t he countr yfac ed an e conomi c cr i s i s , and nat i ve I ndones i ans bl amed e th n ic C h in e s e . In th a t s a m e y e a r t h e L im s m a d e a s e c o n d e x p lo ra to ry trip to S in g a p o re . In M a y1 9 9 8 ra c ial rio ts e ru p ted in Ja k a rta w h e re C h in e se p e o p le w e re a ttac k e d . T h e ir s h o p s a n d h o u s e s w e re b u rn e d d o w n . C h in e s e w o m e n w e re g a n g ra p e d a n d s o m e k ille d . T h e r i o t i n g s p r e a d t o o th e rp a r t s o f th e c o u n try. O n M a y1 3 , 1 9 9 8 M s . L im a rr iv e d a t h e r r e s ta u ra n t a t a b o u t 1 0 :0 0 a .m . to o p e n it. A n hourl at era gr oup of I ndones i an men arr i ved, vandal i zed the r es t aur antand att acke d M s . L i m , t ouchi ng herbr eas tand att empt i ng t o ki s s her . She dr opped t o the fl oor“t oo fr i ght ened t o even l ook up. ” The r i ot er s w r ot e ant i - C hi nes e s l ogans on the w al l s and sh o u ted to M s. L im a n ti-C h in e se slu rs. A f ter th e ym o v e d o n to a ttac k o th e r b u sin e ss e s in thi s C hi nes e nei ghbor hood, an I ndones i an C hr i s t i an fr i end of M s . L i m ’ s hus band es cor t ed herhom e, phy s i cal l yunharm ed butemot i onal l ytr aumat i zed. N othi ng w as l eftof the6

re s ta u ra n t. T e le v is io n n e w s d e s c ri b e d s im ila r e v e n ts ta k in g p la c e th ro u g h o u t I n d o n e s ia . T h e In d o n esian g o v ern m en t sen t arm ed fo rce s into the targe ted C h ines e a rea s to resto re o rd e r, b u t d id n o t su c c e e d in d o in g so f o r a w e e k . A n ticip a tin g f u tu re rio ts, th e L im s d id notr eopen the r es t aur ant . M s . L i m r emai ned i n herhom e dur i ng the r es tof the mont h of M a y. I n February2000 the Li m s m ade a thi r d tr i p t o Si ngapor e t o expl or e the oppor tuni tyof openi ng a bus i nes s ther e, butagai n deci ded thattheycoul d notaff or d t o do s o. O n E a ste r S u n d a y , 2 0 0 0 , M s. L im a n d h e r d a u g h ter w e re in a c a r o n th e ir w a yto chur ch. A gr oup of y oung M us l i m m en s t opped and s urr ounded the ca r . O ne of the men “s nat ched [ thei r ] bi bl es and thr ew them t o the gr ound. ” O ther s “gr abbed [ her ] daught er a n d to u c h e d h e r o n h e r a rm s, h a n d s, a n d th ig h s” a n d a lso to u c h e d M s. L im i nappr opr i at el y . T he men hur l ed ant i - C hi nes e i nvect i ve atthe tw o w om en. O ne man gr abbed M s . L i m ’ s arm , pul l ed hercl os e t o hi m and s ai d “Thi s i s the l as tw arni ng[, ] y ou dog. I f w e eve rs ee y ou go t o chur ch aga i n, w e’ l l ki l l y ou. ” Ther eaf t erM s . L i m l efther hom e onl yforherdaught er ’ s s chool act i vi t i es and t o go t o chur ch. She t ook a l onger rou te t o h er c h u rch an d d isgu ised their bib les b yw rap p ing them in p ap er. Itw as aft er the E ast er as saul tthat the en t i re fam i l ysoug ht t o leave Indon esi a. M s. L i m appl i ed for , and i n A ugus t2002 on hers econd a t t empt w as gr ant ed, a non- i m m i gr ant vi s a t o the U ni t ed St at es . I tw as val i d forthr ee mont hs . H erdaught er ’ s vi s a appl i cat i on7

w as r ej ect ed. T he fa m i l ydeci ded thatM s . L i m s houl d l eave al one, and thatthe daught er s h o u ld re m a in in In d o n e s ia w ith h e r h u s b a n d . M s . L i m l eftI ndones i a and l aw ful l yent er ed the U ni t ed St at es on Sept ember7, 2 0 0 0 . O n C h ristm a s E v e o f th a t y e a r th e re o c c u rre d b o m b in g s o f C h ristia n c h u rc h e s in Ja k a rta a n d e lse w h e re in In d o n e sia . M s. L im ’s h u sb a n d a g a in so u g h t u n su c c e ss f u llyto o b tain th e U n ited S tate s v isa s f o r h im se lf

a n d h is d a u g h ter . T h e d a u g h ter c o n tin u e d to re p o rt to h e r m o th e r th a t sh e h a d b e e n e x p o se d to in c id e n ts o f h a ra ss m e n t o n h e r w a yto sc h o o l. Si nce he rarr i val i n Phi l adel phi a M s . L i m has att ended a Pent ecos t al C hr i s t i an chur ch and manages m oneyfori tas partof i t s tr eas uryt eam. She has been w or ki ng s i nce D ece m ber2002, w hen s he r ece i ved empl oym entauthor i zat i on fr om the I m m i gr at i on Ser vi ce. B efor e thatt i m e s he s ubs i s t ed i n the U ni t ed St at es bycooki ng forfr i ends and on m oneyr ece i ved fr om herpar ent s and fr om hers avi ngs i n I ndones i a. M s . L i m w as pl ace d i n r emoval pr ocee di ngs bya not i ce t o appea rw hi ch cha r ged h e r w ith b e in g s u b

je c t to re m o v a l f

o r r e m a in in g in th is c o u n tr yf o r l o n g e r t h a n p e rm itte d . O n Ju n e 1 5 , 2 0 0 3 M s. L im , thr o u g h c o u n se l, ad m itt e d th e a lleg a tio n s o f th e N o tice to Ap p e a ra n d c o n c e d e d r e mo v a b i l i ty . On J u l y2 6 , 2 0 0 1 , s h e a p p l i e d f o ra s y l u m, w ith h o ld in g o f

re m o v a l an d p ro tec tio n u n d e r th e C A T b a se d o n re lig io u s a n d e th n ic per s ecut i on i nfl i ct ed i n I ndones i a. O n A ugus t29, 2001, M s . L i m ’ s as y l um cas e w as referred t o an IJ for adjudi cat i on on the m eri t s.8

I m m i gr at i on J udge M al l oyhear d the mer i t s of M s . L i m ’ s cas e on O ct ober23, 20 03 . In her oral op i nion i ssued t hat daythe IJ r eferr ed to the 1 96 5 inci den tw hen M s. L i m w as s even y ear s ol d, s t at i ng: “Ther e i s s uffi ci entevi dence i n the bac kgr ound m at er i al s t o es t abl i s h t hatther e have been r i ot s occurr i ng i n I ndones i a per i odi cal l yand thatdur i ng thes e r i ot s C hi nes e ar e s om et i m es and oft en t ar get ed. H ow ever , the begi nni ngs of thes e r i ot s gener al l ys t em from pol i t i cal unr es toreconomi c cr i s es and dur i ng the r i ot s m anyi ndi vi dual s , i ncl udi ng C hi nes e, ar e harm ed. ” R ef erring to the M ay1 3 , 1 9 9 8 loo ti n g an d d estruc ti o n o f th e re stau ran t, the IJ o b serv ed that “[ t] h ere is am p le ev iden ce in the rec o rd to fin d that the re sp o n d en t’ s d e sc rip tio n o f

Ja k a rta d u rin g M a y , 1 9 9 8 , is c re d ib le. T h a t is, the re is a m p le e v id e n c e to es t abl i s h thatm aj orr i ot s occurr ed i n J akart a dur i ng M ayof 1998. ” The I J then addr es s ed the under l y i ng caus es of the r i ot s : “H ow ever , byr es pondent ’ s ow n admi s s i on i n her aff i davi t s , the ec onom yof I ndones i a bega n t o s uffe ri n 1997 and al l document at i on i ndi cat e[s ] thatthe r i ot s of 1998 w er e the r es ul tof di s s at i s fac t i on among t he I ndones i an popul at i on w i th t he ec onom yof I ndones i a[, ] w hi ch i s s t i l l fal t er i ng. D ur i ng thi s per i od of t i m e, the r es t aur antof r es pondentw as des tr oy ed. ” The I J not ed thata w eek l at erthe In d o n e sia n g o v e rn m e n t d isp e rse d th e m ili tar yto g u a rd th e C h in e se c o m m u n iti e s w ith in J akart a. T he I J comm ent ed thatM s . L i m and herdaught erw er e neve rpr event ed fr om att endi ng herchur ch orpart i ci pat i ng i n i t s act i vi t i es , theycont i nued t o do s o and the9

chur ch r emai ns open. T he I J al s o obs erved that , even though M s . L i m t es t i fi ed thats he w as id en ti fied as b eing C h ri sti an b ec au se o f h er e thn ici ty , n o t al l I n d o n esian s w ere M u sli m s, as th ere w ere Ind o n esian m em b ers o f h er c h u rch , an d n o t al l C h ines e a re C hri st i ans. T he I J r ecount ed thatal though “[t ] he r es pondenthas cert ai nl ybeen di s cr i m i nat ed agai ns t[and] [t ] her e i s enough i nform at i on i n the bac kgr ound m at er i al s t o corr obor at e the r es pondent ’ s t es t i m onyr egar di ng di s cr i m i nat i on agai ns tethni c C hi nes e, ” s he obs erved that a n u m b er o f law s h av e b ee n insti tuted that h av e c h an g ed m an yo f th e d iscri m inato ry p r a c t i c e s a g a i n s tth e Ch i n e s e . T h e I J r e c i t e d a n u mb e ro f th e s e l a ws , s t a t i n g “ [ n ] o l a ws c a n p ro h ib it b ia s e d , b ig o te d in d iv id u a ls f ro m c o n tin u in g th e p ra c tic e o f d is c ri m in a tio n . H o w ev er, th ese fo rm s o f d iscri m ination d o n o t r ise t o the lev el of p erse cu ti o n . T h e C o u rt a c k n o w led g e s th a t th e re a re still rem n a n ts o f d isc rim in a tio n a g a in st th e C h in e se in I ndones i a. H ow ever , thes e ac t i ons ar e notcondoned bythe I ndones i an governm ent . ” A tthe hea r tof the I J ’ s ul t i m at e dec i s i on i n thi s cas e on M s . L i m ’ s cl ai m of p erse cu ti o n o n ethn ic gro u n d s is he r ob serv ati o n that “[ t] h ese att ac k s o n the C h ines e a re c ri m in a l a c ts . N o g o v e rn m e n t c a n p ro te c t its c itiz e n s f ro m th e a c tio n s o f

c ri m in a ls . T her e i s notone governm enti n t he ent i r e w or l d thatcan pr ot ecti t s ci t i zens fr om the a c tio n s o f

c rim in a ls, in c lu d in g th e U n ited S tate s. Y e s, th e re is d isc rim in a tio n to a c e rta in degr ee a gai ns tthe C hi nes e i n I ndones i a, and, y es , ther e have been c r i m es comm i t t ed agai ns tthe C hi nes e. H ow ever , agai n, thes e cr i m es do notr i s e t o the l evel of10

per s ecut i on. . . ”. T urni ng t o M s . L i m ’ s cl ai m of per s ecut i on on acc ountof herr el i gi on, the I J s t at ed that“the C our tfi nds thatthe r es pondenti s a C hr i s t i an, thats he att ended a C hr i s t i an c h u rc h in In d o n e sia , an d th a t sh e is c u rre n tlya m e m b e r o f a C h ristia n c h u rc h h e re in Phi l adel phi a. ” H ow ever , appl y i ng the s ame r eas oni ng i tappl i ed t o M s . L i m ’ s cl ai m of ethni c per s ecut i on, the I J hel d t hatM s . L i m had nots uffe r ed pas tper s ecut i on on acc ount of h er r el i gion. R eferr i ng t o the even t s abou tw hich M s. L i m t est i fi ed, the IJ s t at ed “these a re n o t a c tio n s b yth e g o v e rn m e n t o f In d o n e s ia . T h e s e a re a c tio n s b yb ia s e d in d iv id u a ls . E verycountr yexper i ence s i ndi vi dual s w ho w i l l t ar getgr oups of peopl e forvar i ous r eas ons and governm ent s cannots t op thes e pr act i ces compl et el y . ” H avi ng found thatM s . L i m had nots uffe r ed fr om pas tper s ecut i on on acc ountof ethni ci tyand/ orr el i gi on, the I J al s o found that‘ [t ] he r es pondenti n thi s cas e has not convi nced the C our tthats he w oul d be t ar get ed s houl d s he r eturn t o I ndones i a on ac count o f h e r e th n icityo r h e r re lig io n . T h e re f o re , sh e h a s f

a iled to e sta b lish th a t sh e w o u ld su f f e r f u tu re p e rse c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f h e r e th n icityo r re lig io n sh o u ld sh e re tu rn to I ndones i a. ” T he I J fur therconcl uded thatM s . L i m fai l ed t o es t abl i s h el i gi bi l i tyforw i thhol di ng of r emoval orforr el i ef unde rthe C A T . T he I J gr ant ed vol unt arydepartur e i n l i eu of re m o v a l. O n appea l fr om the I J ’ s deci s i on, the B I A on D ece m ber10, 2004 aff i r m ed w i t hout11

opi ni on. T hi s pet i t i on forr evi ew fol l ow ed. I I . Juri s di ct i on and St andard of R evi ew Un d e r8 U. S . C. § 1 2 5 2 ( a ) , we h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n t o h e a ra p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w f

r o m a fin al ord er o f th e B IA . W h en the B IA af firm s an IJ w ith o u t op inion , “w e re v iew the IJ’s o p inion an d scru ti n ize it s rea so n ing . ” S m ri k o v . A sh cro ft, 3 8 7 F . 3 d 2 7 9 , 2 8 2 (3d C ir . 2004) ( i nt ernal quot at i on m arks and ci t at i on om i t t ed) . T her e i s a de novo s t andar d of r evi ew fori s s ues thatar e ques t i ons of l aw . G erbi erv. H ol m es , 280 F. 3d 297, 302 n. 2 ( 3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). In a sy lum ca ses, w e m u st up h o ld the ag en cy ’s fa ctua l fi n d ing s if theyare su p p o rt ed b ysu b stan ti al ev iden ce . S ing h -K au r v. A sh cro ft, 3 8 5 F . 3 d 2 9 3 , 2 9 6 (3d C ir . 2004) . T hati s , the deni al of as y l um can be r ever s ed “onl yi f the evi dence pr es ent ed by [the Pet i t i oner ] w as s uch thata r eas onabl e fa ct fi nderw oul d have t o concl ude thatthe req u isi te fe ar o f p erse cu ti o n ex ist ed . ” IN S v . E li as-Z ac arias, 50 2 U . S . 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 (19 9 2 ); see also A b d il le v. A sh cro ft, 2 4 2 F . 3 d 4 7 7 , 4 8 3 -84 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) (“[T ]he [a g en cy ]’s fi ndi ng m us tbe uphel d unl es s the evi dence notonl ys uppor t s a contr aryconcl us i on, but c o m p e ls it.”). A d v e rse c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n s, lik e o th e r f a c tu a l f in d in g s in i m m i gr at i on pr ocee di ngs , ar e r evi ew ed underthe s ubs t ant i al evi dence s t andar d. M ul anga v . A sh cro ft, 3 4 9 F . 3 d 1 2 3 , 1 3 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). I I I . D i s cus s i on U nder8 U . S. C . § 1158( b) ( 1) , the A t t orneyG ener al m aygr antas y l um t o an al i en w ho i s a “r efug ee” w i thin the m eaning o f 8 U . S . C . § 1 10 1(a) (42). A n ap pli cant m ust12

s how thathe ors he

is u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to re tu rn to , an d is u n a b le o r u n w ill in g to a v a il h im self o r he rself o f th e p rotec ti o n o f [ the c o u n tryo f su ch p erso n ’s nat i onal i tyori n w hi ch s uch a pe r s on l as thabi tual l yr es i ded] , beca us e of per s ecut i on ora w el l - founded f earof per s ecut i on on acc ountof r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i ty , m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ars oci al gr oup, orpol i t i cal o p in io n . . ., 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 0 1 (a )(4 2 )(A ). A sh o w in g o f p a st p e rse c u tio n g iv e s ris e to a re b u ttab le p re s u m p tio n o f

a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n . 8 C .F .R . § 1 2 0 8 .1 3 (b )( 1 ). W her e the appl i canthas demonstr at ed pas tper s ecut i on “the Servi ce s hal l bearthe bur den o f e stab li sh ing b ya p rep o n d era n ce o f th e e v iden ce ” tha t th e p resu m p ti o n o f f u ture per s ecut i on has been r ebutt ed. 8 C . F. R . § 1208. 13( b) ( 1) ( i i ) . T hi s pr es um pt i on can be r ebutt ed i n tw o w ay s : i ) “ther e has been a fundament al change i n ci r cumst ance s s uch that the a p p li ca n t no lon g er h as a w ell -fo u n d ed fe ar o f p erse cu ti o n in the ap p li ca n t’ s co u n try o f n a tio n a lity. . .” o r ii) “ th e a p p lica n t co u ld a v o id f u tu re p e rse c u tio n b yre lo c a tin g to a n o th e r p a rt o f

th e a p p lic a n t’ s c o u n tr yo f n a tio n a lity . . .” . 8 C .F .R . § 1 2 0 8 . 1 3 (b)(1 )(i )(A )-( B ). M s . L i m chal l enges the I J ’ s fi ndi ng thats he di d nots uffe rpas tper s ecut i on and her c o n c l u s i o n th a ts h e f

a i l e d t o e s t a b l i s h a w e l l - f o u n d e d f e a ro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u t i o n . We concl ude that , w hen det erm i ni ng w hetherM s . K i m s uffe r ed pas tper s ecut i on orhad a w el l - founded f

earof futur e per s ecut i on, the I J over l ooked cr i t i cal evi dence . H erfi ndi ng thatthe att acks upon M s . L i m and herdaught erw er e not“on ac count ” of e thni ci tyor rel i gion, bu t , rather, w ere on acco un tof p oli t i cal un res tand / or bad e con om i c con dit i on s,13

f a iled to tak e in to a c c o u n t th e c o n d iti o n s o f In d o n e sia a s d e sc rib e d in th e C o u n tryR e p o rts and the eve nt s thatM s . L i m r ecount ed. O urr ece ntopi ni on i n L i e v. A s hcr oft , 396 F. 3d 530 ( 3d C i r . 2005) , deci ded af t er th e B IA ’s a f

f irm a n c e o f

th e IJ’ s d e c isio n in th e p re se n t ca se , is in stru c tiv e in a n a n a ly sis of the I J ’ s opi ni on, both fori t s s i m i l ar i t i es t o the pr es entcas e and f ori t s s i gni fi cant di ffe r ence s . L i e and he rhus band, I ndones i an ci t i zens , w er e ethni cal l yC hi nes e and C hr i s t i an. L i e al l eged thati n 1997 s ever al nat i ve M us l i m I ndones i ans ent er ed her hus band’ s s t or e, thr eat ened hi m w i th a kni fe, cal l ed hi m a “Chi nes e pi g” and then r obbed hi m . T r aumat i zed bythe r obbery , the hus band l eftforthe U ni t ed St at es i n D ece m ber 1997. M s . L i e al s o al l eged thati n J ul y1998 tw o peopl e knocke d on the doorof her h o m e, called h er a “C h ines e p ig” a n d d em an d ed en try . T h eyk n o ck ed d o w n the d o o r, threa tene d to b u rn d o w n h er h o u se, an d d em an d ed m o n ey . T h eytoo k m o n eyan d jew elry and cutheri n t he l eftfor earm w i th a kni fe w hen s he tr i ed t o defe nd her s el f. Forthe next tw enty - one mont hs L i e and he rs on cont i nued t o l i ve i n the s ame house w i thoutfur ther i ncident s. L i e and he rs on l eftI ndones i a i n M ar ch 2000, ent er i ng the U ni t ed St at es as noni m m i gr antvi s i t or s . She acknow l edged i n heras y l um pr ocee di ngs thats he ca m e t o the U n ited S tate s “ to se e if

sh e w a n ted to se ttl e h e re .” S h e f iled a n a sy lu m a p p lica tio n w ith herhus band and s on as der i vat i ve appl i cant s . T he I J found thatthe r obber i es of Li e and h e r h u sb a n d w e re m o tiv a ted a t lea st in p a rt b ya d e sire to p u n ish th e m b e c a u se o f th e ir14

e th n ic ity, f

in d in g s u p p o rt f

o r t h is c o n c lu s io n in e v id e n c e o f th e 1 9 9 8 a n ti- C h in e s e ri o ts . H avi ng found pas tper s ecut i on, the I J hel d thatthe pr es um pt i on of futur e per s ecut i on had notbeen r ebutt ed byevi dence of cha nged condi t i ons i n I ndones i a. O n appea l the B I A r ever s ed. I tfound that“w i th r egar d t o the s i ngl e i nci dentof abus e [Li e] has des cr i bed, a r obberyof hers t or e, ther e w as no evi dence thati tw as m ot i vat ed byherr el i gi on. A s forhercl ai m thatthe r obberyw as m ot i vat ed byher C hi nes e ethni ci ty , the onl yevi dence t o s uppor tthatcl ai m w as hert es t i m onythather att acke r s s ai d ‘ y ou C hi nes e pi gs , I w anty ourm oney , ’ ” w hi ch the B I A found t o be i ns uffi ci ent . Fur ther , the B I A hel d thatthe r obberyi nci dentdi d notcons t i tut e per s ecut i on a n d th a t L ie la c k e d a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r o f f u tu re p e rs e c u tio n . O urcourtaff

i r m ed the B I A , butthe r eas oni ng of ourdeci s i on l eads t o a di ffe r ent r es ul ti n thi s cas e. T he fi r s tques t i on w e addr es s ed i n L i e w as w hetherther e w as s ubs t ant i al evi dence to su p p o rt th e B IA ’s f

in d in g th a t th e ro b b e rie s o f th e L ies w e re n o t o n a c c o u n t o f th e ir ethni ci tyorr el i gi on butw er e s i m pl yeverydayr obber i es . A s i ngl e ethni c s l urw as found i ns uffi ci enti n l i ghtof the s tr ong evi dence thatthe att acke r s w er e mot i vat ed s i m pl yby m o n ey : th e a tt ac k ers f

led a fter steali n g L ie’s j ew els an d m o n ey ; her C h ines e n eigh b o rs w er e notr obbed; and Li e and he rs on l i ved i n peac e foral m os ttw o y ear s fol l ow i ng the att ack. I n the pr es entcas e the I J i n r eac hi ng herdeci s i on vi r tual l yi gnor ed the15

o v e rw h e lm in g e v id e n c e th a t th e a ttac k s u p o n M s. L im w e re o n a c c o u n t o f h e r e th n icity and r el i gi on. I ns t ead s he r el i ed upon the under l y i ng caus es of the att acks as a r eas on for h e r f in d in g th a t M s . L im h a d n o t b e e n p e rs e c u te d o n a c c o u n t o f h e r e th n ic ity o r r e lig io n . R efe rr i ng t o t he t i m e w hen M s . L i m as a chi l d w as hi dden underherbed as I ndones i ans s oughtherfathert o ki l l hi m and s t oned herhous e, the I J s t at ed that“the begi nni ngs of th e se rio ts g e n e ra llyste m f ro m p o lit ica l u n re st o r e c o n o m ic c rise s a n d d u rin g th e rio ts m an yind ividu als, inclu d ing C h ines e, are h arm ed . ” R ef erring to the 1 9 9 8 ri o ts, the IJ w r ot e that“the ec onom yof I ndones i a bega n t o s uffe ri n 1997 and al l document at i on i ndi cat e[s ] thatthe r i ot s of 1998 w er e the r es ul tof di s s at i s fac t i on among t he I ndones i an popul at i on w i th t he ec onom yof I ndones i a[, ] w hi ch i s s t i l l fal t er i ng. ” R a th e r th a n re ly in g u p o n M s. L im ’s u n re b u tted tes tim o n ya n d th e C o u n tryR e p o rts w hi ch demonstr at ed bey ond di s put e thatthe att acks upon M s . L i m w er e on ac countof her ethni ci tyand, i n t he ca s e of the 2000 epi s ode, herethni ci tyand r el i gi on, the I J r el i ed on the under l y i ng pol i t i cal and ec onom i c fa ct or s as the ca us e of thes e att acks . T hi s i s w hat w e w arned aga i ns tdoi ng i n L i e.

W e have r ecogni zed that“[a ] per s ecut orm ayhave mul t i pl e mot i vat i ons for hi s orherconduct , butthe per s ecut orm us tbe mot i vat ed, atl eas ti n part , by one of the enumer at ed gr ounds . ” Lukw ago v. A s hcr oft , 329 F. 3d 157, 170 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ; s ee a l s o C hang v. I N S, 119 F. 3d 1055, 1065 ( 3d C i r . 1997) (find ing p erse cu ti o n o n ac co u n t of p o li ti ca l op inion w h ere p erse cu tor’s ac ti o n w as “ m o ti v ated , at l ea st i n p art” b ythe a p p li ca n t’ s p o li ti ca l op inion ). 396 F. 3d at535. U nl i ke the s i tuat i on i n L i e, i n ourcas e the evi dence di s cl os es thr ee s er i ous att acks16

u p o n M s . L im w h ic h c a n o n ly h a v e b e e n o n a c c o u n t o f h e r e th n ic ity a n d /o r r e lig io n . W e des cr i be above gener al condi t i ons i n the country , the 1965 att ack upon M s . L i m ’ s hous e, the 1997 and 1998 r aci al r i ot s dur i ng w hi ch M s . L i m w as att acke d i n herr es t aur ant , and the E ast er att ack o n M s. L i m and her dau gh t er that occurr ed in 200 0. N on e of these even t s w ere i sol at ed robb eri es or other purel ycri m i nal act s. U nl i ke Li e, M s . L i m di d notw ai tal m os ttw o y ear s t o l eave the country . I n 1996, 1 9 9 7 , an d 2 0 0 0 sh e a n d h e r h u sb a n d w e n t to S in g a p o re to d e ter m in e if th e yc o u ld re lo c a te ther e. Shor t l yaft erthe East er2000 epi s ode M s . L i m and the r es tof herfami l ybegan their ef fo rt s to o b tai n v isas to tr av el t o the U n it ed S tat es. H er h u sb an d an d d au g h ter w ere uns ucce s s ful , butM s . L i m s ucce eded i n ent er i ng the U ni t ed St at es on Sept ember7, 2000. T he I J ’ s concl us i on thatthe att acks on M s . L i m w er e noton acc ountof her ethn ici tyan d /or reli g ion b ec au se th e e m o ti o n s o f th e p eo p le w h o att ac k ed h er w ere w h ip p e d u p b yp o lit ica l an d e c o n o m ic c o n d iti o n s o v e rlo o k s th e e v id e n c e th a t eth n icity a n d re lig io n p la y e d a m a jo r r o le in th e a tta c k s u p o n M s . L im . I n ourcas e the I J found thatthe ac t s aboutw hi ch M s . L i m compl ai ned cons t i tut ed m ere di scr i m i nati on againstM s. L i m and that “these fo rm s of dis cri m i nati on do no tri se t o the l evel of per s ecut i on. ” The I J r eci t ed that“[n] ew l aw s have be en ena ct ed w hi ch now perm i tuni ver s i t i es t o t eac h C hi nes e l anguage s . C hi nes e cul tur al hol i day s ar e now c e leb ra ted o p e n ly . T h e law s b a n n in g th e re c o g n iti o n o f c u ltu ra l h o lid a y s f

o r th e e th n ic C h in e s e h a v e b e e n a b o lis h e d . C h in e s e a re n o w p e rm itte d to c e le b ra te c u ltu ra l h o lid a y s .In Lie , a ft e r h oldingthat th eB IA f ound c or re c tly that Liehad f

aile d toe sta

bli shpa st 2 perse cution, we f

urther agree d with the BIA’s findingthat L ie failed to establish a well-f ounded fea r of f uture persecution if she were to re turn to Indonesia. Lie was not entitled to the regulatory presumption in that case . Absent that pre sumption, L ie had f ailed to demonstratethat she had a subjective fe ar of

perse cution and had f

ailed to establish the objec tive prongof the we ll-founded fe ar t e st b e c a

us esh efaile d toe sta

bli shan in div idu a lize d risk of pers e c uti on

or that th e reis a pattern or prac tice of persecution of Chinese Christians in Indonesia. 17 T h e ya re p e rm itt e d to stu d yC h in e se lan g u a g e s in sc h o o l. T h e ya re p e rm itt e d to o b tain per i odi cal s i n t he C hi nes e l anguage [s ] . T heyar e no l ongerr equi r ed t o i dent i fy th e ms e l v e s a s e th n i c Ch i n e s e o n th e n a t i o n a l I D c a r d s . ” T h e I J o b s e r v e d th a t“ [ n ] o l a ws c a n p ro h ib it b ia s e d , b ig o te d in d iv id u a ls f ro m c o n tin u in g th e p ra c tic e o f d is c ri m in a tio n . H ow ever , thes e form s of di s cr i m i nat i on do notr i s e t o the l evel of per s ecut i on. ” H ow ever , M s . L i m w as notcompl ai ni ng aboutuni ver s i t i es bei ng unabl e t o t eac h C hi nes e l anguage s , orbei ng unabl e t o cel ebr at e C hi nes e cul tur al hol i day s , orbei ng u n a b le to o b tain p e rio d ica ls in th e C h in e se lan g u a g e . M s. L im se t f o rth in c o n sid e ra b le det ai l the as s aul t s upon herand herfami l y , as s aul t s thatthe I J fai l ed t o t ake i nt o acc ount w hen she held t hat the ev ents that M s. L i m recoun t ed d i d n ot r i se t o the l evel of past per s ecut i on orfea rof futur e per s ecut i on. T he ca s e mustbe r emanded s o thatthi s cr i t i cal ev iden ce w il l enter into th e d eterm ination w h ethe r, u p o n ap p li ca ti o n o f th e stan d ard announce d i n Fat i n v. I N S, 12 F. 3d 1233, 1240 ( 3d C i r . 1993) , M s . L i m has es t abl i s hed pas tper s ecut i on of fe arorfutur e per s ecut i on . 2 I I I . C oncl usi on A lth o u g h in as y lum ca ses w e m u st up h o ld the ag en cy ’s fa ctua l fi n d ing s if theyare18

s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence , i n the pr es entcas e w e conc l ude thatthe I J ’ s fi ndi ng thatM s . L i m fai l ed t o es t abl i s h pas tper s ecut i on orfea rof futur e per s ecut i on m us tbe re v e rs e d b e c a u s e it f

a ile d to ta k e in to a c c o u n t c ri tic a l u n d is p u te d e v id e n c e . T h e B IA e rre d in a f

f irm in g th e IJ’ s d e c isio n . W e re m a n d th e c a se to th e B IA w ith i nst ruct i on s t o rem and i tt o the I J for r econ si derat i on of h er deci si on and a rul i ng on M s. L i m ’s asy l um and w i thh oldi ng of rem ov al cl ai m s.