FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8625954
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Hovsepyan v. Gonzales

No. 8625954 · Decided November 14, 2006
No. 8625954 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
November 14, 2006
Citation
No. 8625954
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Hovsep Hovsepyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the IJ’s decision for substantial evidence and may reverse only if the evidence compels such a result. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 338 (9th Cir.1995). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Hovsepyan did not establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of an enumerated ground. See Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 794-95 (9th Cir. 2005) (requiring petitioner to “show: (1) an incident ... that rise[s] to the level of persecution; (2) that [wa]s ‘on account of one of the statutorily-protected grounds; and (3)[wa]s committed by the government or forces the government is either ‘unable or unwilling’ to control)” (quoting Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 655-56 (9th Cir.2000)). Hovsepyan failed to identify his attackers and failed to establish that the attack was motivated by Hovsepyan’s political opinion. See Sangha v. INS, 103 F.3d 1482, 1488, 1490 (9th Cir.1997) (discussing ways applicant may establish political opinion and that harm was based on that political opinion). Because Hovsepyan did not establish eligibility for asylum, it follows that he did not satisfy the more stringent standard of proof for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir.2006). Hovsepyan waived his claim for relief under the CAT by not challenging the IJ’s denial, affirmed by the BIA, in his opening brief. See Castro-Perez v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 1069, 1072 (9th Cir.2005). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Hovsep Hovsepyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of remov
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Hovsep Hovsepyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum, withholding of remov
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Hovsepyan v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on November 14, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8625954 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 →