2005 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 12-22-2005 

# V e r t e ni k u v . BIC E 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 . 04-3632

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_2005

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 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i 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
" V e r t e ni k u v . BIC E " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 60. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/60NOT 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 : 04-3632 Z ENEPE VERTENIKU, Petitioner

v. BUREAU OF IMMI GRATI ON &CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; J OHNCA RBO NE, Fiel d Of fi ce Di rect or; MI CH AELCH ER TOFF; SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURI TY ALB ERT O G ONZALES, Attor ney General of

theUnite d St ate s, Re sp on dents

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 ( B oar d N o. A 77- 565- 733)

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

on J une 28, 2005 B E FO R E : R O T H , R E N D E L L and B A R R Y , C i r cui tJ udges

(F iled: December 22, 2005) OPI NI ON2

R O T H , C i r cui tJ udge: Pet i t i oner , D r . Z enepe V er t eni ku, i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of A l bani a. She ent er ed th e U n ited S tate s o n N o v e m b e r 2 9 , 1 9 9 7 . S h e f iled f o r a sy lu m , w ith h o ld in g o f re m o v a l, and r el i ef unde rt he C onvent i on A gai ns tT or tur e on N ovember25, 1999. A ft erhear i ngs b e f o re m u lti p le im m ig ra tio n ju d g e s, sh e w a s d e n ied a ll relie f. D r. V e rte n ik u a p p e a led to the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( B I A ) . O n A ugus t20, 2004, the B I A di s m i s s ed the appea l on t he bas i s of a “ fundament al change i n ci r cumst ance s i n A l bani a” s i nce V e rt e n ik u le f

t in 1 9 9 7 s u c h th a t s h e n o lo n g e r h a d a w e ll- f o u n d e d f e a r o f p e rs e c u tio n . D r. V e rt e n ik u p e titio n e d f o r r e v ie w . F o r t h e re a s o n s e x p la in e d b e lo w , w e w ill d e n yth e p e titio n . I . F act ual B ackground an d P roce dural H i s t ory A s t he fa ct s ar e w el l know n t o t he part i es , w e w i l l gi ve onl ya br i ef de s cr i pt i on of th e f a c ts a n d th e p ro c e d u ra l p o s tu re o f th e c a s e . D r . V er t eni ku hol ds a PhD i n the fi el d of food- s tuffs t echnol ogy . I n 1991, s he jo in e d th e U lq in i, a n o n -g o v e rn m e n tal o rg a n iza tio n c o n sis tin g o f A lb a n ian s o f

e th n ic M on t eneg ri n d escent , i nter est ed in prom oti ng dem ocracyand op po si ng the C om m un i st r egi m e. I n 1995, s he bec ame Pre s i dentof the U l qi ni . I n 1995, w hi l e part i ci pat i ng i n an in ter n a tio n a l co n f

e re n c e in A u stria , sh e sp o k e o u t ag a in st E n v e r H o x h a ’s d icta to rsh ip in A l bani a and a gai ns tt he C om m uni s tr egi m e. She al s o t ook publ i c pos i t i ons agai ns tthe
r egi m e w hi l e i n A l bani a. She has des cr i bed att acks and/ orthr eat s agai ns therw hi ch s he3

at tr i but es t o m ember s of the C om m uni s tr egi m e and t o herpubl i c oppos i t i on t o t hat re g im e . T h e s e in c id e n ts o c c u rr e d in J a n u a ry, M a y , J u n e , J u ly an d S e p te m b e r 1 9 9 7 . Som e of he rat t acke r s w er e arm ed. I n addi t i on, s he r ece i ved mul t i pl e thr eat eni ng tele p h o n e c a lls. S h e re p o rte d so m e o f th e se in c id e n ts to th e p o lice , w h o a lleg e d lysa id thattheycoul d notpr ot ecther . D r . V ert eni ku ent er ed the U ni t ed St at es on N ovember29, 1997. Subse quent l y , s he fi l ed foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and r el i ef unde rthe C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rt u re . I n herw r i t t en opi ni on, t he I m m i gr at i on J udge ( I J ) s ugges t ed thatthe as y l um a p p lic a tio n w a s n o t tim e ly al th o u g h th is d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o b e th e b a s is o f h e r r u lin g . A ddi t i onal l y , t he I J poi nt ed t o an i ncons i s t encyw i t h r egar d t o D r . V ert eni ku and her hus band’ s w her eabout s on J ul y17, 1997. A gai n, thi s does notappea rt o be the bas i s of the IJ’s ru li n g . T h e IJ d en ied D r. V erten iku reli ef b ec au se th e IJ f

o u n d that D r. V e rte n ik u ‘s te stim o n ylac k e d c re d ib ili ty , w a s “ c o n sis ten tlye v a siv e ,” a v o id e d sp e c if icity a n d su f f icie n t d e tail w ith re g a rd to th e c o m p lain e d o f 1 9 9 7 in c id e n ts, a n d f

a iled to p rov ide a p laus ible an d co h ere n t acc o u n t of the b asis o f h er f

ea r of p erse cu ti o n . T h e c o re of the I J ’ s pos i t i on w as t hatal t hough D r . V ert eni ku as cr i bed thes e al l eged i nci dent s of vi ol ence and thr eat ened vi ol ence t o comm uni s t s s ervi ng the r egi m e, s he neve rt es t i fi ed
w i th r egar d t o anys peci fi c i nci dentthatheral l eged a t t acke r s i dent i fi ed themsel ves as com m un i st s or otherw i se i den t i fi ed them sel ves atal l . T hu s, the IJ dou bted that these i nci dent s had anyt hi ng t o do w i t h D r . V ert eni ku’ s r ol e i n t he U l qi ni . T he I J concl udedD r. V e rte n ik u c o n tes ts th e sta n d a rd o f re v iew . W e d isc u ss th is a rg u m e n t in 1 S e c tio n II I. 4 thatpas tper s ecut i on w as notes t abl i s hed. Si m i l ar l y , the I J hel d t hatfutur e per s ecut i on w as notes t abl i s hed, not i ng t hatD r . V ert eni ku tr avel ed t o and fr om A l bani a s ever al t i m es in 1 9 9 7 . D r . V er t eni ku appea l ed t o t he B I A . T he B I A di s m i s s ed the appe al . T he B I A hel d,
w ith o u t r eg ard to the iden ti tyo f th e p erp etrators o f th e 1 9 9 7 incid en ts de scribe d b yD r. V er t eni ku and w i t houtr egar d t o w hetherornotthos e i nci dent s r i s e t o t he l evel of p e rse c u tio n re q u ire d b ysta tu te, th a t th e re h a d b e e n a f u n d a m e n tal c h a n g e in ci r cumst ance s i n A l bani a s i nce 1997 a nd thatthe curr entA l bani an governm ent , al t hough i tevol ved outof form ercomm uni s t s , had nots oughtr etr i but i on agai ns tthe opponent s of the pr i orC om m uni s tr egi m e. T he B I A ’ s A ugus t20, 2004, deci s i on w as bas ed upon a 2 0 0 4 D e p a rt m e n t o f

S ta te c o u n tr yp ro f

ile o f w h ic h th e B IA to o k a d m in is tr a tiv e n o tic e . I I . Juri s di ct i on and St andards of R evi ew W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e rI mmi g r a t i o n a n d Na t i o n a l i t yAc t , 8 U. S . C. § 1 2 5 2 (b )( 1 ) ( 2 0 0 5 ), t o re v ie w f in a l o rd e rs o f

th e B IA . W i th r egar d t o deni al of appl i cat i ons foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and p ro tec tio n u n d e r C o n v e n tio n A g a in st T o rtu re o u r sta n d a rd o f re v iew is h ig h lyd e f

e re n tial: “the B IA ’s find ing m u st be u p h eld u n less the e v iden ce n o t on lysu p p o rt s a c o n tr ary concl us i on, butcompel s i t . ” A b d ill e v . A sh c ro ft , 2 4 2 F . 3 d 4 7 7 , 4 8 3 -84 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). 15 I I I . D i s cus s i on D r . V er t eni ku cont ends ( 1) t hatthe i m m i gr at i on j udge i ncorr ect l yappl i ed the oney earbarforfi l i ng as y l um cl ai m s , ( 2) thats he s houl d have be en found c r edi bl e, ( 3) that s he has pr oduced s uffi ci entcorr obor at i ve document aryevi dence and has carr i ed her bur den of pr oof, and ( 4) t hatherr i ghtt o an unbi as ed and i m par t i al adj udi cat orw as v io la te d b yth e IJ . O u r r e v ie w , h o w e v e r, i s o f th e B IA ’s f

in d in g s a n d its f

in a l o rd e r. See D i a v. A sh c ro ft , 353 F. 3d 228, 241 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( en banc ) . O nl yw hen the B I A has aff i r m ed o n th e b a s i s o f

t h e I J ’ s f

i n d i n g s o rwh e n i th a s n o tma d e a n i n d e p e n d e n tr e v i e w, d o we e x a m in e th e d e c is io n o f th e IJ . S e e A b d u la i v. A sh c ro ft , 2 3 5 F . 3 d 5 4 2 , 5 4 9 , n . 2 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). H e re , the B IA d id n o t af f irm o n th e b a sis o f

th e d e c isio n o f

th e IJ. It b a se d its d ec isi o n o n the S tat e D ep artm en t’ s co u n tryp rof il e, w ith o u t r eg ard to the o n e-y ea r ba r, D r. V er t eni ku’ s cr edi bi l i t yordocument at i on i n s uppor tof hercl ai m , orthe s ubs t ance of the recor d creat ed b efore t he IJ. D r . V er t eni ku ar gues , how ever , thats he has es t abl i s hed pas tper s ecut i on and a
w el l - founded f

earof futur e per s ecut i on, qual i fy i ng foras y l um and w i thhol di ng of rem o v al, n o tw ith stan d ing the S tat e D ep artm en t’ s p rof il e ind icati n g ch an g ed co u n try co n d it ion s. T h at rep o rtstat es: “[ t] h e re jecti o n o f th e f

o rm er C o m m u n istreg im e a p p ea rs t o be al m os tt ot al . I n contr as tt o s om e otherform erC om m uni s tcountr i es , ther e i s no i ndi cat i on t hatt he form erC om m uni s t s - - w hetheri n t he G overnm ent , oppos i t i on, orW e n o te th a t D r. V e rte n ik u p u ts f o rw a rd n o tes tim o n y , ce rtific a tio n o r a f f id a v it 2 oreven a pr offe rorpr om i s e of one , and put s forw ar d no tr eat i s e orr epor t , publ i c or pr i vat e, cont es t i ng t he s peci f i c fi ndi ngs of the St at e D epart m ent ’ s r ece ntcountr ypr ofi l e, on w hich the B IA rel i es. W e al s o not e thatD r . V er t eni ku ar gues i n herbr i ef thatherm ember s hi p i n a m i nor i tyr el i gi on s t r engthens heras y l um cl ai m . W e s ee no i ndi cat i on thatthi s ar gum ent w as as s er t ed i n herappl i cat i on, i n hert es t i m onyoreven be for e the B I A . W e do not 6 enfo rcem ent or gan i zat i on s - - have sou gh tretri bu t i on againstop po nen t s of t he C om m un i st r egi m e ort he manyi ndi vi dual s w ho have r eturned t o A l bani a af t erhavi ng fl ed abr oad. ” A . R . 3 ( O p. of the B I A ( A ugus t20, 2004) quot i ng D epart m entof St at e Pr ofi l e of A s y l um C l ai m s and C ount r yC ondi t i ons forA l bani a ( M ar ch 2004) ) . T hi s r epor t , then, i s not m e re lya p ro f

o rm a re c o rd o f

g e n e ra lize d im p ro v e m e n ts in A lb a n ia. R a th e r it sp e c if ica lly
r ej ect s D r . V ert eni ku’ s cl ai m and i tconcomi t ant l ym eet s the governm ent ’ s bur den of p ro o f. C f. B e ris h a

j v. A sh c ro

ft , 378 F. 3d 314, 328 ( 3d C i r . 2004) ( “bur den of pr oof i n a c h a n g e d -c o u n try -c o n d iti o n s re b u ttal is s q u a re lyo n th e g o v e rn m e n t”) . D r. V e rte n ik u p u ts fo rw ard n o o n -po int co u n terva il ing ev iden ce . Ind ee d , the B IA ’s reli an ce o n the c o u n try pr ofi l e i s s ubs t ant i al evi dence i n t he r ecor d s uppor t i ng i t s deci s i on and i s , thus , s uffi ci ent to u p h o ld it. D r. V erten iku n ex t argu es th at th e B IA too k ad m inistrati v e n o ti ce o f th e c o u n try p rof il e b u t con clus ion s rea ch ed there w ere n o t bri ef ed b ythe p arti es. B ec au se D r. V er t eni ku has had no oppor tuni t yt o cont es tthos e fi ndi ngs , s he as ks forr emand fort hat purpos e. T he governm enthas r es ponded thatthe pr ocedur al l ycorr ectr out e t o t es tthe BI A’ s t a k i n g o f

a d mi n i s t r a t i v e n o t i c e i s t o mo v e t o r e o p e n p r o c e e d i n g s b e f o r e th e BI A. 2a d d re s s it o n a p p e a l. 7

D r . V er t eni ku has notdone s o. Fi nal l y , D r . V er t eni ku as ks us , on t he bas i s of s ever al pol i cyar gum ent s , t o r ee x a mi n e t h e s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e t e s t– o u rs t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w f o ra g e n c y , i n c l u d i n g BI A, act i on. W e do notneed t o di s cus s t he det ai l s of thi s ar gum ent . W e nee d onl ypoi ntout thatours t andar d of r evi ew i s s etbys t atut e, 8 U . S. C . § 1252( b) ( 4) ( B ) , and thatw e have , s ittin g e n b a n c , m a n d a te d th e s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e te s t. See D ia v . A sh c ro ft , 353 F. 3d at 247. W e w i l l notdepartfr om t hats t andar d. I V . C oncl usi on Fort he r eas ons s etoutabove, w e w i l l denythe pet i t i on forr evi ew of the dec i s i on o f th e B IA .