From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tsomo v. Gonzales

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 3, 2006
188 F. App'x 616 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

Argued and Submitted June 15, 2006.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Jagdip Singh Sekhon, Esq., Sekhon & Sekhon, PLC, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, James E. Grimes, Esq., Melissa Neiman-Kelting, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Lit., Marie K. McElderry, Esq., Mark L. Gross, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.


On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A79-583-869.

Before: GOODWIN, O'SCANNLAIN, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

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.

The court sua sponte vacates the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision and remands the petition for review for an actual finding of the nationality of the petitioner. The petitioner's testimony was unworthy of belief, but in declaring it impossible to decide nationality, the IJ disregarded documentary and other evidence tending to show that in all probability she was, in fact, a refugee from Tibet. After making a finding of nationality, the Board should proceed to a decision on the merits of her claim. VACATED and REMANDED. It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Tsomo v. Gonzales

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 3, 2006
188 F. App'x 616 (9th Cir. 2006)
Case details for

Tsomo v. Gonzales

Case Details

Full title:Tsering TSOMO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 3, 2006

Citations

188 F. App'x 616 (9th Cir. 2006)

Citing Cases

Nygard v. City of Orono

Several other circuits have concluded that they are not required to apply Morales or have refused to extend…

Ariz. All. for Retired Am. v. Hobbs

And, contrary to Defendants' assertions, a "law may be invalidated on vagueness grounds even if it could…