Opinion ID: 2980170
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Evidence of Changed Country Conditions

Text: Petitioners contend that the BIA erred by refusing to consider some of the documents submitted with their motion to reopen as evidence of changed country conditions. We find no merit to such contention. Petitioners apparently assume that the BIA “refused” to consider some of the documents submitted with their motion to reopen—State Department country reports and Petitioners’ updated I-589 forms—because the BIA did not mention those documents in its decision. In considering a motion to reopen, however, the BIA is not required “to mention every piece of evidence before it or every logical element of a motion.” Zhang v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 851, 854 (6th Cir. 2008). The BIA need only analyze and explain the basis on which its decision was made. Id. The BIA owes no “duty to rehearse” the rest of an alien’s evidence for the sake of completeness. Id. at 855. Petitioners stated in their motion to reopen that they feared persecution based on their Georgian ethnicity as a result of Russia’s 2008 invasion of Georgia. While referencing some but not all of the evidence submitted by Petitioners in support of their motion to reopen, the BIA concluded that Petitioners failed to show how the Russian invasion materially altered their asylum and -20- No. 09-4514 Khakhnelidze, et al. v. Holder withholding claims. Perhaps the BIA could have better explained its conclusion; however, our review of all of the evidence of changed country conditions leads us to the same conclusion. The country reports reveal that the war lasted one week, with fighting concentrated in two separatist regions of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. To be sure, the materials depict general violence and citizen displacement, particularly in Abkhazia and South Ossetia but also in some adjacent areas—including the city of Gori where Marine’s aunt lost her home as a result of the hostilities. While noting that the war could have enduring effects, the country reports contained little, if anything, to suggest that Petitioners would be persecuted based on their Georgian ethnicity should they return to Tbilisi, where they once resided.