FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8621490
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Arutyunyan v. Gonzales

No. 8621490 · Decided May 19, 2006
No. 8621490 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
May 19, 2006
Citation
No. 8621490
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM *** Vartan Arutyunyan and Djulietta Arutyunyan, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Armenia, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s order denying their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for substantial evidence, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), we grant the petition for review. Upon review of the record, we conclude that the agency’s adverse credibility determination is not supported by substantial evidence. The agency’s alternative finding that the mistreatment experienced by Var-tan did not rise to the level of persecution is also not supported by substantial evidence. Vartan testified that he was detained for three days, and beaten to the point of unconsciousness. See Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 656 (9th Cir.2000). We deem petitioners credible, see Guo v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1194, 1203 (9th Cir.2004), and further conclude that they have established persecution based on their stated political beliefs. We therefore remand for a determination of whether evidence of changed country conditions rebuts, on an individualized basis, the presumption that petitioners have established a well-founded fear of future persecution. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-17 , 123 S.Ct. 353 , 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam). PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM *** Vartan Arutyunyan and Djulietta Arutyunyan, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Armenia, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s order denying
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM *** Vartan Arutyunyan and Djulietta Arutyunyan, husband and wife and natives and citizens of Armenia, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s order denying
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Arutyunyan v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on May 19, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8621490 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →