2010 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 5-18-2010 

# H am z a D el k

i v . Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 09-2411

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd 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 l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " H a mza D e l ki v

. Atty Ge n U SA" (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1322. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1322NOT 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. 09- 2411

___________ H A M Z A D E L K I, Pet i t i oner

v. ATTO RN EY G ENER AL O F THE UN I TED STATES

____________________________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof t he B o a rd o f Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 099- 758- 737) Im m igrati o n Ju d g e: M arg are t R . R eich en b erg

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui t L A R 34. 1( a)

A pr i l 21, 2010 B efor e: A M B R O , C H A G A R E S and A L D I SE R T , C i r cui t J udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: M ay18, 2010)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM H amza D el ki has fi l ed a pe t i t i on forr evi ew of t he fi nal or derbyt he B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) aff i r m i ng t he I m m i gr at i on J udge’ s ( “I J ”’ s ) deni al of D el ki ’ s r eques t s foras y l um , w i t hhol di ng of r emoval , and pr ot ect i on undert he C onvent i on2

A gai ns t T or t ur e ( “C A T ”) . For t he r eas ons t hatfol l ow , w e w i l l denyt he pet i t i on for r e v i e w. T h e p a r t i e s a r e f

a m i l i a r w i t h t h e b a c k g r o u n d o f t h i s c a s e , a n d s o w e p r o v i d e o n l y a s u m m a ry o f

th e p ro c e e d in g s . 

### Hamza Delki i s a

ci ti ze n o f Isr ae l. He ar

ri ved in the Un it ed S tates in2 0 0 2 o na to urist v isa, return edto Israel, th enreturn edto th e U n itedS tates in 20 04 onanother t ouri st

visa . He overs tayed his vis a andwas pla ce d in rem ov al p r o c e e d i n g s . H e c o n c e d e dr e mo v ab i l i ty , an di nJu l y 2 0 0 7 h e a

p p l i e df o r a s yl um, wi thhol di ng of r e m ova l , and CAT r e l i e f. On Fe br uary 25, 2008, the I Jc onduc t e d a h earin g o nD elk i’s claim

th at h e f earedreturn in g to Israel. De l ki t e s t i fi e d at

the he ar i ng that

he l i ve d i n Di rhanna , avi l l a ge of Chr i s t i ans and Mu s l i m s i n the no rthe rn p art of I s r a e l , ne ar

Le bano n. He wa s am athe m at i c s t e a c he r . He s e rve d for

two or thr e e m onths i n the m i l i t ary , but be c aus e he ha d not

fi ni s he d hi s twoye ar s e rvi c e obl i gat i on, he wa s unabl e t o obt a i n at e a c hi ng pos i t i on i n I s r a e l . De l ki co n ced edth at h e w aitedm o re th ano n e year to ap p ly f o r asylum af ter h is 2 0 0 4 arriv al in the Unite d S tate s, explai ning that he m ar ri ed a Unite d S tate s c it iz en in 20 05 . He noted th at h is m arriag e w as co n sid eredto b e un accep tab le inh is co mm un ity inIsrael; ul t i m at e l y

he and hi s wi fe di vor c e d. De l ki furthe r e xpl a i ne d that

awar br oke out be twe e n I s r a e land Le banon i n m i d- 2006. Hi s hom e t own wa s ne ar the ar e abe i ng s he l l e d, and hi s fam i l y

a dvi s e d hi m

that i t wa s t oo dange r ous for

hi m t o r e t urn, a l though his famil y

did n ot re locate .3



### D e l k i s t at e dth at

h e w a s a f

r a i dt o r e t urnt o I s r a e lb e c au s e o f

th e “ t a l kn o w a d ays about the war , ” hi s r e l at i ons hip wi th an Am e r i c an gi r l fr i e nd, hi s ne w l i fe s tyl e i n the Un it ed Stat es , andbett er

te ac hing op po rt

un it ie s i n the Un it ed Stat es . He a ls o n oted that the I sr ae ligo vernm ent wou ld po ss ibly jailhim du e t o the ci rc um st ance s of h is m il it ar y se rvic e del inqu ency ; he had ob ta ined a s ix-m on th deferm ent, tr avel ed to the Unite d Stat es , andnever r et

urned. Delki t es ti fied that the I sr ae lim il it ar

y te leph on ed his famil y ’s ho m e, and w hen inf

orm ed that

Delki was in the Unite d S tate s, the m es sa ge was that Delki wou ld be contac te d upo n h is re turn to Is ra el . Del ki st at ed that no prob le m

ar ose, bu t he feare d ret

urning to Is ra eland b ei ng fo rc ed to se rve the re m ai nd er of his mil it ar

y se rvic e t im e on the fron t l ines of the fighting, beca

use a s an A ra

b living n ear the bo rder of Le banon, he ha d gr e at e r knowl e dge of the t e rr a i n. He a l s o de s c r i be d hi s c onc e rns about fanat i c Mus l i m

gr oups i n hi s c omm

uni ty that ha d l abe l e d hi m

atr a i t or for havi ng serv edinth e Israeli m ilitary , ev enth o u g hth o se g ro up s h adn o t d o n e h arm to h im o r h is fam il y thus far. In his a sylum

applic at ion aff

idavit , Del ki st at ed that

his fea r of ret urning to Is ra el w as b asedo nh is m arriag e to a n o n -M u slim A m ericancitizenin2 0 0 5 , w h ichw o u ld ca use him to be viewed as Am eric aniz ed and a tr ai tor t o M usli m fu nd am enta li st s. When as ked w hy

his a pp li cati onst at em ent did no t m enti onhis fear of ret urning to Is ra el be c aus e of the war , hi s m i l i t ary obl i gat i on, or

hi s e m pl oy m e nt di ffi c ul t i e s , De l ki explai ned that he did no t r em em ber what he had writt en, andhis a pp li cati onwasW e h a v e ju ri s d ic tio n o v e r t h e tim e ly p e titio n f o r r e v ie w p u rs u a n t to 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 2 5 2 (a). 4 

### s uppos e d t o c ont a i n that

i nform at i on. The I Jfound that

De l ki di d not

t e s t i fy c r e di bl y . The I Ja l s o de t e rm i ne d that De l ki ha d not m e t hi s bur de n of pr oof for

a s yl um , wi thhol di ng, or

CAT r e l i e f, e ve n a s s um i ng his t es ti m on y

were cr edible . Further , the IJconcluded that the as ylum applic at ion w as un ti m el y . The IJdenied re li ef and o rder ed re m ov alto Is ra elif Delki did no t depart vol unt ar i l y . On Apr i l14, 2008, the BI A di s m i s s e d De l ki ’ s a ppe a l . The BI A found no c l e ar e rr or i n the I J ’ s a dve r s e c r e di bi l i ty fi ndi ng and a c c or di ngl y

found no e rr or

i n the de ni a lof a s yl um

and wi thhol di ng r e l i e f. The BI A not e d that i t di d not r e a c h the que s t i on of whe the r

De l ki woul d have e s t abl i s he d e l i gibi l i ty for r e l i e f a s s um i ng that

hi s t e s t i m ony wa s c r e di bl e , and furthe r not e d that

i t ne e d not a ddr e s s the i s s ue of whe the r the a s yl um ap p licatio nw as un tim ely . Inad d itio n , th e B IAco n clu d edth at D elk i h adn o t m et h is b ur d e no f p r o o f o nh i s C A T c l a i m. T hi s pet i t i on forr evi ew fol l ow ed. 1 T o the e x tent that the B IA d ef erred to the IJ’s find ing s, w e w il l r ev iew the IJ’s d ec isi o n as su p p lem en ted b ythe B IA . S ee X ie v. A sh cro ft, 3 5 9 F . 3 d 2 3 9 , 2 4 2 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). W e re v iew thes e f ind ing s, inclu d ing an ycre d ibil ityd eterm ination s, u n d er a s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s ta n d a rd . S e e C a o v . A tt’ yG e n ., 4 0 7 F .3 d 1 4 6 , 1 5 2 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). T h e C o u rt m u st u p h o ld th e c re d ib ili tyd e ter m in a tio n o f th e B IA u n les s “ a n yre a so n a b le a d ju d ic a to r w o u ld b e c o m p e lle d to c o n c lu d e to th e c o n tr a ry.” 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 (b )( 4 )( B ).D el ki ’ s as y l um appl i cat i on w as fi l ed af t erM ay11, 2005, and t hus t he pr ovi s i ons 2 o f th e R E A L ID A c t a p p ly. S e e C h u k w u v . A tt’ yG e n ., 4 8 4 F .3 d 1 8 5 , 1 8 9 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 7 ). T he R E A L I D A ctpr ovi des t hatan adve r s e cr edi bi l i t ydet er m i nat i on can be bas ed on inco n sist en cies, i n h ere n t i m p laus ibil it ies, inac cu rac ies, an d o ther f ac tors, w ith o u t r eg ard t o wh e t h e r t h e yg o t o t h e h e a r t o f a n a p p l i c a n t ’ s c l a i m. 8 U. S . C. § 1 1 5 8 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B) ( i i i ) . As w il l be n o ted, t h e f

ac tors reli ed u p o n b ythe IJ in th is case co n ce rne d m att ers tha t are c e n t r a l t o De l k i ’ s c l a i m. 5 W e do notover t ur n a cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng s i m pl ybeca us e w e w oul d m ake a di ffe r ent fin d ing . S ee G ab u n iy a v . A tt o rne yG en era l, 4 6 3 F . 3 d 3 1 6 , 3 2 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 6 ). S u b stan ti al ev iden ce su p p o rt s the ad v erse cre d ibil ityd eterm ination . T h e B IA 2 r el i ed on t he I J ’ s det er m i nat i on, ci t i ng t he mat er i al di ffe r ence bet w een D el ki ’ s t es t i m ony and hi s as y l um appl i cat i on s t at ement r egar di ng hi s fea r of r etur ni ng t o I s r ael . I ndeed, as not ed above , D el ki ’ s t es t i m onyfocus ed on fe ar s r el at ed t o hi s m i l i t ar ys er vi ce obl i gat i on and rel at ed em ploy m ent di ffi cult i es, w hil e his asy l um app l i cat i on did not r el at e t ho se f e a rs. D e lk i p ro v id e d lit tle e x p lan a tio n f o r th e m o re e x p a n siv e e x p lan a tio n o f h is f e a rs in hi s t es t i m ony , and t he i ncons i s t encyconce r ns t he hea r t of hi s cl ai m forr el i ef. D el ki ar gues t hathi s fai l ur e t o fi l e an a s y l um appl i cat i on t hati s notas compl et e as hi s t es t i m ony does not r equi r e t he conc l us i on t hathi s t es t i m onyw as notcr edi bl e, and he c i t es S m o lnaik o v a v . G o n za les, 4 2 2 F . 3 d 1 0 3 7 , 1 0 4 5 (9th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ), in su p p o rt . H o w ev er, t hi s C our t has r ecogni zed thatm at er i al om i s s i ons i n t he as y l um s t at ement can s uppor tan adver s e cr edi bi l i t ydet er m i nat i on. See, e. g. , X i e, 359 F. 3d at242- 43 ( i nvol vi ng om i s s i on of t he al i en’ s w i fe’ s s t er i l i zat i on i n t he appl i cat i on w hen t hatfac t w as advanc ed att heD e lk i ar g u e s th a t th e IJ’ s d e ter m in a tio n th a t th e a sy lu m a p p lica tio n w a s u n tim e ly 3 w a s e rro n e o u s b e c a u se h e e sta b lish e d e x tra o rd in a ryc irc u m sta n c e s to e x c u se h is u n tim e ly fil ing . W e d o n o t r ea ch this i ssu e b ec au se su b stan ti al ev iden ce su p p o rt s the ag en cy ’s adver s e cr edi bi l i t yfi ndi ng. h ea ri n g as th e v eryb asis fo r t h e c lai m ). 3 W e now addr es s D el ki ’ s C A T cl ai m . D el ki ar gues t hathe has s how n t hat m em b ers o f th e Israe li m il it aryw o u ld torture h im b yfo rcing h im to co m p let e h is m il it ary s er vi ce a nd t o comm i t hum an r i ght s vi ol at i ons upon hi s peopl e. H e al s o s ugges t s t hathe has m ett he s t andar d forC A T r el i ef bys how i ng t hatt he governm entof I s r ael d e m o n stra tes w ill f

u l b lin d n e ss to th e to rtu re o f its c iti z e n s. H o w e v e r, w e n o te th a t itis n o t en o u g h f

o r p u b lic o f

f icia ls to b e “ w ill f

u llyb lin d ” to to rtu ro u s a c ts. T o c o n stitu te t or t ur e, t he off

i ci al s m us t “have t he goal or purpos e of i nfl i ct i ng s ever e pai n ors uffe r i ng. ” Pi er r e v. A t t ’ yG en. , 528 F. 3d 180, 190 ( 3d C i r . 2008) ( en banc ) . T he r ecor d her e does not compel t he conc l us i on t hatD el ki “more l i kel yt han not ” w oul d be t or t ur ed i f he r e t u r n e d t o I s r a e l . S e e Ta r r a wa l l yv . As h c r o f t , 3 3 8 F . 3 d 1 8 0 , 1 8 7 ( 3 d Ci r . 2 0 0 3 ) ; 8 C. F . R. § 2 0 8 . 1 6 (c)(2). We wi l l d e n yt h e p e t i t i o n f o r r e v i e w.