Remus Cosmin Mihai and Laura Mihai sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The Immigration Judge found Remus Mihai not credible and ruled in the alternative that his mistreatment did not amount to persecution. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed only the adverse credibility determination, leaving the alternative grounds unaddressed. The petitioners then filed a petition for review in the Ninth Circuit challenging these decisions.
The Ninth Circuit exercised jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1) but denied the petition based on procedural forfeiture. The court reviewed the adverse credibility determination for substantial evidence but found the petitioners failed to preserve the claim. The opinion states, 'We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim.' The petitioners merely asserted that the IJ 'erred' without providing specific arguments. Furthermore, the court noted that challenges to the alternative bases for the IJ's decision were irrelevant because the BIA did not rely on those grounds. Citing Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, the court explained, 'In reviewing the decision of the BIA, we consider only the grounds relied upon by that agency.'
The petition for review is denied, and the BIA's order denying asylum and related protections stands. The motion to stay removal is also denied, though the temporary stay remains in effect until the mandate issues. The decision leaves the underlying merits of the asylum claims unresolved because the court did not reach them.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download