Bogale Tegegn v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., 702 F.3d 1142

Tegegn is a 68-year-old Ethiopian citizen who entered the U.S. in February 2008 and sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief.
IJ denied relief, finding no past persecution or well-founded fear; BIA dismissed on the same rationale but did not adopt the IJ’s reasoning.
Tegegn’s evidence includes his leadership in the AAPO, writings criticizing the government, and credible testimony about Ethiopian political conditions.
Key actions by the regime included harassment, threats, and past abuses against opposition leaders and activists; a 2005 confrontation led Tegegn to hide for months.
The 2002 hit-and-run incident, though described as a government tactic, lacked corroboration tying the car to the government and Tegegn was unharmed for years afterward.
On appeal, the court grants review for the well-founded fear claim based on pattern or practice, remanding to the BIA for proper consideration.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Past persecution sufficiency	Tegegn argues the 2002 hit-and-run shows past persecution.	BIA found only intimidation/harassment not past persecution.	No past persecution established; record supports BIA.
Pattern or practice well-founded fear	Tegegn contends a pattern or practice of persecuting opposition leaders applies to him.	BIA rejected pattern or practice claim as inadequately argued.	Remand needed; BIA failed to analyze subjective/objective components and pattern evidence.

Kebede v. Gonzales, 481 F.3d 562 (8th Cir. 2007) (standard of review for substantial evidence on asylum claims)
Ladyha v. Holder, 588 F.3d 574 (8th Cir. 2009) (persecution is extreme; threats must be credible and tied to protected ground)
Quomsieh v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 602 (8th Cir. 2007) (harassment and unfulfilled threats alone may not constitute persecution)
Corado v. Ashcroft, 384 F.3d 945 (8th Cir. 2004) (threats of death must be specific and tied to protected ground)
Makonnen v. INS, 44 F.3d 1378 (8th Cir. 1995) (pattern or practice analysis in asylum cases)
Woldemichael v. Ashcroft, 448 F.3d 1000 (8th Cir. 2006) (pattern or practice must be systemic/pervasive)
Kyaw Zwar Tun v. INS, 445 F.3d 554 (2d Cir. 2006) (pattern or practice of persecution against pro-democracy activists)
Feleke v. INS, 118 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 1997) (well-founded fear can be based on individual or pattern/group persecution)
Makonnen v. INS, 44 F.3d 1378 (8th Cir. 1995) (identification with a group can establish well-founded fear)
Pavlovich v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 613 (8th Cir. 2007) (credibility and objective reasonableness in future persecution analysis)
Singh v. Gonzales, 495 F.3d 553 (8th Cir. 2007) (highly deferential judicial review in asylum determinations)