Opinion ID: 200329
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Denial of the Application for Asylum

Text: The burden of proof for establishing eligibility for asylum lies on the petitioner. 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(a). Applicants must show either past persecution or well-founded fear of future persecution. Id. § 208.13(b). Such past or future persecution must be based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Id. § 208.13(b)(1). The petitioner bears the burden of providing conclusive evidence that he was targeted on any of the five grounds. Velásquez v. Ashcroft, No. 01-1741, 2002 WL 31904478, at  (1st Cir. Dec. 30, 2002); see, e.g., Aguilar-Solis, 168 F.3d at 571 (finding that petitioner failed to carry his burden in proving past persecution because his account lacked the requisite degree of specificity, and because the vague evidence of alleged persecution that the petitioner adduced failed to establish a sufficient nexus between the events that he described and any ground enumerated). Here, we conduct our substantial evidence review of the IJ's decision regarding asylum and withholding of deportation,4 rather than the BIA's opinion. Ordinarily, Courts of Appeals review decisions of the [BIA], and not those of an IJ. When the BIA does not render its own opinion, however, and either defers 4 Albathani does not appeal the IJ's decision regarding his claim under the Convention Against Torture. -16- [to] or adopts the opinion of the IJ, a Court of Appeals must then review the decision of the IJ. Gao v. Ashcroft, 299 F.3d 266, 271 (3d Cir. 2002). The burden was on Albathani to show that he was persecuted based on his membership in a particular social group, or for his political opinions. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b). We assume arguendo that membership in the Lebanese Forces satisfies the particular social group or political opinion categories. The difficulty for Albathani is that the IJ did not find him credible on these claims. Accepting that he had been robbed and beaten by Hezbollah, the IJ did not find this to be persecution based on one of the five categories. The record provides adequate reason for doubt. The two incidents on the road may well have been, as the IJ suggested, nothing more than the robbery of someone driving a Mercedes with cash in his pocket. The IJ thought Albathani's fear of persecution was undercut by his twice returning to Lebanon after trips abroad. It is true that the IJ did not specifically comment on his evidence -- a significant omission -- that Hezbollah later visited his sister's house and threatened him, and that this visit led him to seek refuge in the United States. But there was reason to doubt the event occurred; only Albathani's word established it, and there was a conspicuous lack of corroborating evidence from his family members in America. This is not an instance of the INS -17- improperly insisting on evidence that was not likely to be available to a refugee. See, e.g., Gailius, 147 F.3d at 45-46. There is nothing in the record to establish that Albathani was denied communication with his family in America. He was represented by counsel, and his cousin was present at one hearing with him. Indeed, Albathani was living with his brother in New Hampshire at the time of the hearing, and his aunt was present at an earlier hearing. He was also in contact with his older brother, then in Brazil, who had been in the Lebanese Forces and could have corroborated much of his story. Petitioner argues that the IJ ignored evidence of Albathani's limited capacities in making her decision. We do not find support for this. The IJ's decision acknowledges Albathani's limited education (he left school at 15) and claim that he had head trouble since his beatings in her decision. His inarticulateness at the hearing was recognized by both the IJ and his own counsel. The IJ also noted Albathani's tendency to fluctuate on dates during the hearing, but did not rely on such changes in her decision. For example, during the hearing Albathani initially testified that his travel to Syria took place in 1999, even though he had already left for the United States by that date. He also demonstrated a tendency to agree with whatever assertion was put to him. During cross-examination, Albathani said that during his trip to Syria, he had received passport stamps from both the Syrian and -18- Lebanese border guards, testimony which was belied by his passport. The IJ took these limitations into account, commenting during the hearing that she did not hold [his inarticulateness] against him. Albathani's inconsistency problems go well beyond mere fluctuations. He showed a pattern of embellishing his story. In each context, Albathani added a new incident. He originally described a single beating (the 1998 one) in his credible fear interview. He did not mention at that time that he was hospitalized as a result of this beating. Then, in his application, Albathani added a 1996 incident, complete with hospitalization and a coma, as well as expanding the later incident to include almost a week's hospitalization. At the hearing itself, Albathani mentioned for the first time a second incident in 1998, the December threat delivered to his sister. Given this pattern, we find adequate support for the IJ's reservations regarding Albathani's credibility. As petitioner points out, some instances in the record support his credibility. One example is his correct identification of a Lebanese Forces commander. It is also true that the IJ did not explicitly discuss the Country Conditions Report for Lebanon, admitted into evidence, other than as useful background. These Reports provide some support for Albathani's claimed fear of kidnapping and murder. Hezbollah is reported to detain and mistreat prisoners from groups to which it is opposed. There is no -19- evidence, however, of a pattern of kidnappings by Hezbollah in the last decade, although kidnapping was widespread during the civil war. But these Reports would not have straightened out the inconsistencies in Albathani's own stories. On our review of the entire record, we do not find evidence sufficient to compel reversal of the denial of Albathani's asylum claim.5 He, a fortiori, fails to satisfy the standard for withholding of deportation. See Velásquez, 2002 WL 31904478, at  n.2.