Case Name: Lenord JOVIN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-30
Citations: 584 F. App'x 370
Docket Number: No. 07-73799
Parties: Lenord JOVIN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 584
Pages: 370–371

Head Matter:
Lenord JOVIN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 07-73799.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 22, 2014.
Filed July 30, 2014.
Sarah J.M. Jones, Esquire, Law Offices of Sarah J.M. Jones, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
Gregory Darrell Mack, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Ronald E. Le-fevre, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: GOODWIN, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Lenord Jovin, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's adverse credibil ity determination. Tekle v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 1044, 1051 (9th Cir.2008). We dismiss in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Jovin's challenge to the BIA's denial of voluntary departure. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); see also Gil v. Holder, 651 F.3d 1000, 1006 (9th Cir.2011) (court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary denial of voluntary departure where no legal question raised).
Substantial evidence does not support the agency's finding that Jovin's asylum application omitted reference to receiving threats before June 18, 2002. See Bandari v. INS, 227 F.3d 1160, 1167 (9th Cir.2000) (reversing where IJ's determination that testimony and application were inconsistent was not supported by the record.). Substantial evidence also does not support the agency's finding that Jovin's testimony regarding his father's death is contradicted by a report in the record. See id. Accordingly we grant the petition for review and remand Jovin's asylum, withholding of removal and CAT claims on an open record for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002); Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1095-96 (9th Cir.2009). Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; GRANTED in part, REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.