Background
Petitioner Saul Eliso Alvarenga, a native and citizen of El Salvador, sought review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order upholding an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The petitioner argued that his youth, ignorance of the laws, and inability to read or write English constituted extraordinary circumstances justifying an untimely filing.
The court’s reasoning
The court affirmed that the petitioner’s reasons for his untimely filing did not amount to extraordinary circumstances under Section eight thousand one hundred fifteen-eight of the United States Code. However, the court found that the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in its adverse credibility determination. The BIA relied on four grounds, but the record showed the petitioner had disclosed his extortion payments in his affidavit and never changed his answer regarding the timing of those payments when confronted with his departure date. Because the first and third grounds were unsupported, the court held that the remaining grounds were insufficient to sustain the adverse credibility determination without further review.
In my family I am the only one that works and I could not pay one day. I was told by a gang member, the one they call the strange one and I was told that I only had one more opportunity.
Opinion at page 3
What it means going forward
The decision requires the Board of Immigration Appeals to reconsider the adverse credibility determination and provide the petitioner an opportunity to explain any inconsistencies used to support the finding.