FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8688949
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Par v. Mukasey

No. 8688949 · Decided September 10, 2008
No. 8688949 · Ninth Circuit · 2008 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
September 10, 2008
Citation
No. 8688949
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Victor Gaspar Chocoy Par, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2004), and we review questions of law de novo, Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that the government rebutted the presumption that Par had a well-founded fear of future persecution by demonstrating that country conditions in Guatemala changed significantly since his departure. See Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 999 (9th Cir.2003). The IJ referred to the relevant sections of the 2002 State Department country reports providing “an individualized analysis of how changed conditions will affect [Par’s] situation.” Id. at 998 (internal quotation and citation omitted). Contrary to Par’s contention, the proceedings were not “so fundamentally un *865 fail- that [he] was prevented from reasonably presenting his case.” Colmenar, 210 F.3d at 971 (citation omitted). Moreover, Par failed to demonstrate that additional time to examine the country report would have affected the outcome of the proceedings. See id. (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge). The record does not support Par’s assertion that the IJ relied on the 1997 report rather than that 2002 report. In his opening brief, Par fails to address, and therefore has waived, any challenge to the BIA’s determination that he is not eligible for withholding of removal or CAT relief. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir.1996). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Victor Gaspar Chocoy Par, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Victor Gaspar Chocoy Par, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Par v. Mukasey in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on September 10, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8688949 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 →