Court Opinion

ID: 9435585
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 00:11:18.4463+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:04.245896
License: Public Domain

SILVERMAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result. We previously have found “that IJs and the BIA are not free to ignore arguments raised by a petition.” Sagaydak v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir.2005). Here, in his brief to the BIA, Petitioner explicitly challenged the IJ’s x’eliance on the asylum officer’s assessment to refer to discredit his removal hearing testimony. The BIA’s failure to address the argument in its two-page decision was error. The error was particularly significant because the assessment to refer played such a substantial role in the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. I would remand the case to the BIA to consider Petitioner’s argument in the first instance and, if necessary, to reevaluate its adverse cx-edibility finding.