N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
KIER AN SM Y TH, AKA Kie ran Ja m e s, AKA C hris Storm ,

Pe t i tione r,
v. W ILLIAM P. B ARR , Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 19-71006 Age n c y No. A200-963-579
M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d July 16, 2020 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : IKUTA a

nd HUR W ITZ, C irc uit Judge s , a

nd TAGLE, *** Distric t Judge
.



# FIL ED JUL 20 2020 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).

* * * The Honora

ble Hilda G. Ta g le , Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Southe rn Distric t of Te xa s, sitting by de signa tion.Kie ran Sm y th pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls (B IA) orde r de ny ing his c la im s for sta t utory withholding of rem ova l a nd prote c tion unde r the C onve n tion Aga inst Torture(C A T). W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w. Sm y th’ s a ppe a l of the a g e nc y ’ s de nia l of withholding of re m ova l fa ils be c a use the re c ord doe s not c o m pe l the c onc lusion tha

t the U.K. gove rnm e nt is

“ una b le or unwilling”

to c ontrol his alle g e d

pe rse c utors. Rahimzade h v

. Holde r , 613 F.3d 916, 921–23 (9th C i r. 2010). Sm yth a rgue s tha t he wa s pe rse c ute d by pe ople a ffilia

te d with theIrish R e public an Arm y (IR A), but the re c ord c onta ins no
e vide nc e tha

t U.K. a uthoritie s would fa il to re spond if Sm yth sought prote c tion. Se e id. at 923. Sm

y th did not te ll the a

uthoritie s a

bout the one inc ide nt of a lle ge d pe rse c ution tha

t oc c urre d in the U.K., whe n he wa s gra z e d by bulle ts shot from

a pa ssing m otorc y c le by

one or m ore pe rsons he suspe c ts we re c onne c te d with the IR A. (The othe r inc ide nts of a lle ge d pe rse c ution oc c urre d in Ire la n d). Nor did he
c la im tha t re porting theinc ide nt would ha ve be e n futile . During im m igration proc e e dings, Sm

y t h did not pre se nt e vide n c e showing tha t pe rse c ution by the IR

A is wide spre a d a

nd we ll-known but ignore d by the U.K. gove rnm e nt. Se e BringasRodrigue z v . Se ssions , 850 F.3d 1051, 1066 (9th C ir. 2017) (e n ba nc ). B e c a use the
re c o rd doe s not c om

pe l the c o n c lusion tha

t the U.K. gove rnm e nt is una b le or unwilling to c ontrol Sm

y th’ s pe rse c utors, his c la im for withholding of rem ova l
2fa ils, a

nd the re is no ne e d to c onside r whe the r Sm yt h wa s pe rse c ute d

on a c c ount of his politic a l opinion or me m be rship in a

c ogniz a ble pa rtic ula r soc ia l group. Sm y th’ s a ppe a l of the a g e nc y ’ s de nia l of C AT re lie f like wise fa ils be c a use the re c ord doe s not c o m

pe l the c onc lusion tha

t Sm yth will “m ore like ly

tha n not” be torture d in the U.K. “b y or at the instiga

tion of or with the

c onse nt or
a c quie sc e nc e of” a g o ve rnm e nt offic ia l. 8 C .F.R . §§ 208.16(c )(2), 208.18(a )(1). Nothing in the re c ord indic a te s tha t U.K. offic ia ls would fa il to interve ne if m a de
aware tha t m e m be rs of the IR

A we re going to torture

Sm yth. Se e 8 C .F.R
. § 208.18(a )(7). The pa

ne l la c ks jurisdic tion to c o nside r Sm yth’ s e xtra -re c ord inform a t ion re ga

rding his intera c tions with the U.K. c o nsula

te . 8 U.S.C
. § 1252(b)(4)(A). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

3