Opinion ID: 3062720
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: IJ’s Ruling on Remand

Text: On remand, the IJ set a hearing for February 18, 2009. Louis moved for a continuance to obtain additional testimony and corroborating evidence. The IJ denied the motion, stating that Louis had not indicated what additional evidence she would obtain that previously could not have been provided and that her request exceeded the scope of the BIA’s remand. The IJ did not conduct an additional evidentiary hearing and again denied Louis all relief. This time, the IJ discredited Louis’s testimony based on various inconsistencies and found that Louis could have but did not provide corroborative evidence. The IJ also concluded that Louis did not establish past persecution, future persecution or harm on account of a protected ground. As for her future persecution claim, the IJ found that Louis subjectively feared returning to Haiti. However, noting that Louis lived unharmed in Haiti for three months after Lavalas Party members went to her house, the IJ concluded that Louis’s fear was not wellfounded.