Artan Sulce v. Loretta E. Lynch
661 F. App'x 421
| 6th Cir. | 2016Background
- Artan Sulce (with wife Lindita and two sons), Albanian nationals, entered U.S. in 2004 on G-1 visas and remained after visas expired; they conceded removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B).
- In 2010 they applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection, claiming past threats and fear of future persecution tied to Artan’s work as a driver/bodyguard for Albanian foreign officials and witnessing a 1998 assassination.
- Artan testified to three threatening incidents in Albania (June–July 2002 and November 2004) and said he reported one to police; Lindita initially omitted a 2004 trip in testimony but had included it in her written application.
- The IJ pretermitted asylum as untimely under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B), found the family not credible based on inconsistencies and lack of corroboration, and alternatively found no nexus to a protected ground and insufficient CAT showing.
- The BIA affirmed the IJ’s findings; the Sulces petitioned for review, challenging credibility and other determinations but not the asylum-timeliness ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction over untimely asylum | Sulces did not contest timeliness | DHS/BIA: asylum untimely; discretionary/factual | Court: Sulces waived timeliness challenge; no review of that discretionary finding |
| Adverse credibility | Sulces argued IJ improperly relied on failure to produce police report and misc. inconsistencies | BIA/IJ: multiple inconsistencies, omissions, impeachment, and lack of corroboration justified adverse credibility under REAL ID Act | Court: Substantial evidence supports adverse credibility; not compelled to reverse |
| Nexus to protected ground | Sulces implicitly argued threats tied to political/official service | BIA/IJ: even if credible, failed to show persecution on account of protected ground | Court: Sulces waived challenge to nexus; alternative BIA finding dispositive |
| CAT protection | Sulces argued risk of torture if returned | BIA/IJ: record insufficient to show torture more likely than not | Court: Waived challenge to CAT alternative finding; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Khalili v. Holder, 557 F.3d 429 (6th Cir. 2009) (review of BIA opinion when it issues separate opinion)
- Yu v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 700 (6th Cir. 2004) (standard of review for agency factual findings)
- Almuhtaseb v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 743 (6th Cir. 2006) (jurisdiction limits over untimely asylum claims)
- Cruz-Samayoa v. Holder, 607 F.3d 1145 (6th Cir. 2010) (waiver for unraised issues)
- Hachem v. Holder, 656 F.3d 430 (6th Cir. 2011) (REAL ID Act totality-of-the-circumstances credibility analysis)
- El-Moussa v. Holder, 569 F.3d 250 (6th Cir. 2009) (adverse credibility fatal to asylum/withholding/CAT claims)
- Al-Najar v. Mukasey, 515 F.3d 708 (6th Cir. 2008) (challenge waiver to alternative findings)