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 a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3. T he panel un ani m ou sl y f i nd s thi s c as e s ui t abl e f

or deci si on w i tho utoral ** ar gu m ent . F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). T he H onor abl e K e vi n T hom a s D uf f y , U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJudge f orthe *** S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof

N e w Y ork, s i tt i ng byde s i gna t i on. NO T F ORP UB L I C AT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT J O S E A N D R E S ) N o. 06- 73224 AS C E NC I O- P AN DO , ) ) A ge nc yN o. A 073- 758- 453 P et i t i on er , ) ) ME MORA ND UM * v . ) ) E R IC H . H O L D E R Jr . , A tt orney ) G e n e r a l, ) ) R e s p o n d e n t. ) )

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 do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r5, 2010 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B e f o r e : F E RNA ND E Z a n dS I L VE R MAN, C i r c u i tJu d g e s , a n dDU F F Y, *** D i stri ctJudg e. J os e A ndr e s A s c e nc i o- P a ndo, ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of P e ru, pe t i t i ons f

or 

# FI LED OC T 21 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

r e v ie w o f

th e B o a r do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ’ d e n ia l o f h is ap p lic a tio n f

o ra s y lu m . W e de nythe pe t i t i on. T he B I A ’ s de t e rm i na t i on tha ta n a l i e n i s note l i gi bl e f ora s y l um m us tbe uphe l d i f “ ‘ s upport e d byr e a s onabl e , s ubs t a nt i a l , a nd pr oba t i ve e vi de nc e on the r e c o r dc o n s i d e r e da s aw h o l e . ’ ” I N S v . El i a s - Za c a r i a s , 5 0 2 U . S. 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 , 1 1 2 S. C t . 81 2, 81 5, 11 7 L . E d. 2d 38 (199 2). “ Itcan b e r ever se d o nl y i f the evi dence pr e s e nt e d . . . w a s s uc h tha tar e a s onabl e f a c t f i nde rw oul d ha ve t o c onc l ude tha tthe r e qui s i t e f

e a rof pe r s e c ut i on e xi s t e d. ” I d. ; s e e a l s o F a r a h v. A s hc r of t , 348 F . 3d 1 1 5 3 , 1 1 5 6 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 3 ). W h en an al i en seek s t o o v ertu rn th e B IA ’ s ad v erse de t e rm i na t i on, “ he m us ts how tha tthe e vi de nc e he pr e s e nt e d w a s s o c om pe l l i ng thatno re as on abl e f

ac t fi nd ercoul d fai l t o fi nd the re qu i si t e f ear of per se cut i on . ” E lia s - Z a c a r ia s , 5 0 2 U .S . a t 4 8 3

– 8 4 , 1 1 2 S . C t. a t 8 1 7 . W h e n a n a s y lu m c la im is i nvol ve d, a n a l i e n m us ts how e i the rpa s tpe r s e c ut i on oraw e l l - f ounde d f e a rof future pers ec ut i on thati s “ subj ec t i vel y genui ne and o bj ec t i vel y r ea sonabl e. ” F i sh er v . IN S , 7 9 F . 3 d9 5 5 , 9 6 0 (9 th C i r. 1 9 9 6 ) (en b an c); see al so G u v . G o n zal es, 45 4 F . 3d 10 14 , 10 19 (9th C i r. 20 06 ). A s c e nc i o c a nnotm e e thi s he a vybur de n. T he e vi de nc e s upport s the concl usi on thathe di d n otshow thathe suff er ed pastpers ec ut i on on ac coun tof a po l i t i ca l op i ni on . S ee Y an X i a Z hu v. M uk as ey , 53 7 F . 3d 10 34 , 10 43 (9th C i r.S e e F e duny a k v. G onz a l e s , 477 F . 3d 1126, 1129 ( 9th C i r . 2007) ; G r a vav. 1 IN S , 20 5 F . 3d 11 77 , 11 81 –8 2 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). 3 2008) . H e s ugge s t s tha the w a s pe r s e c ut e d f ore xpos i ng of

f i c i a l c orrupt i on, but 1 the evi dence does notcom pel a c on clusi on thathe di d exp ose c orrupt i on , m uch l e s s tha the w a s pe r s e c ut e d f ordoi ng s o. S e e M ol i na - M or a l e s v. I N S , 237 F . 3d 1 0 4 8 , 1 0 5 1

– 5 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ; s e e a ls o K o z u lin v . IN S , 2 1 8 F .3 d1 1 1 2 , 1 1 1 7 ( 9 th C i r. 20 00 ). M oreover, he di d n otpres entevi dence thatcom pel l ed a f i nd i ng of an obj ec t i vel y r ea sonabl e f ear of f uture per se cut i on . R ather, hi s r eturn t o P eru t en y e a r s a f t e rthe i nc i de nti n que s t i on r e s ul t e d i n no ha rm a nd he w a s a c tua l l ygi ve n a f r ie n d lyr e c e p tio n . T h a t m a k e s it e v e n le s s lik e lyth a t h e w ill n o w b e p e r s e c u te d . S e e B e l a y ne h v. I N S , 213 F . 3d 488, 491 ( 9th C i r . 2000) . F i na l l y , the abs e nc e of p a s tp e r s e c u t i o n r e n d e r s th e h u man i t a r i a n e x c e p t i o n i n ap p l i c ab l e , a n di f s o me p ersecu t i o n d i do ccu r, th e ev i d en ce d o es n o tco m p el a fi n d i n g th ati tw as so a tr oc i ous tha ta s y l um m us tbe gr a nt e d. S e e i d. ; K um a rv. I N S , 204 F . 3d 931, 93 4– 35 (9th C i r. 20 00 ); cf . M att erof C hen, 20 I. & N . D ec . 16 , 19 –2 0 (B IA 19 89 ). P e t i t i o n DE NI E D.