Kyna La v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., 701 F.3d 566

La, a Cambodian citizen, overstayed her visa and sought asylum, withholding, and CAT relief based on political persecution fears.
She and her husband Lim were members/affiliates of the SRP; Lim faced beating, jailing, and later disappeared, allegedly due to political activity.
La received a court appearance order, an arrest warrant, and a publicist posting of Lim's disappearance, but maintains she would be persecuted if returned.
DHS investigated La's asylum documents, including showing Lim’s death certificate to a Phnom Penh official.
The IJ found La credible but denied past persecution, future feared persecution, and likelihood of torture; the BIA dismissed the appeal.
The court reviews for substantial evidence; it upholds the agency’s denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether La showed past persecution	La argues threats and Lim’s disappearance show persecution.	Record shows threats were non-specific and not tied to the government or Lim’s status; persecution not shown.	No past persecution established.
Whether La has a well-founded fear of future persecution	Fear is genuine and supported by threats and arrest actions.	Fear is not objectively reasonable given time gaps and lack of direct link to La.	Fear not objectively reasonable; no well-founded fear.
Whether La is entitled to withholding of removal	Past and future persecution show more likely than not risk.	Withholding standard is higher; she fails the well-founded fear and causation requirements.	Withholding denied.
Whether confidentiality breach and evidence considerations violated due process	Disclosure of documents to officials breached confidentiality, tainting proceedings.	Disclosures did not create a reasonable inference of asylum and were part of routine verification; no prejudice.	No due process violation; no prejudice.

Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 775 (8th Cir. 2008) (review of IJ/BIA; substantial evidence standard)
Nadeem v. Holder, 599 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2010) (extremely deferential substantial evidence review)
INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (Supreme Court 1992) (persecution defined; government connection required)
Malonga v. Holder, 621 F.3d 757 (8th Cir. 2010) (extremes of persecution; definition applied)
Cubillos v. Holder, 565 F.3d 1054 (8th Cir. 2009) (persecution must be inflicted by government or unable to be controlled)
Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929 (9th Cir. 2000) (threats and persecution standards; intent required)
Bernal-Rendon v. Gonzales, 419 F.3d 877 (8th Cir. 2005) (family safety factor reducing fear of persecution)
Averianova v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 890 (8th Cir. 2007) (confidentiality breach and inference of asylum)
Lin v. United States Dep’t of Justice, 459 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2006) (assertions from disclosures; asylum inference)
Ngure v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 2004) (clear probability standard for withholding)
Alemu v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d 572 (8th Cir. 2005) (CAT analysis separate where torture risk exists)
Kipkemboi v. Holder, 587 F.3d 885 (8th Cir. 2009) (due process and fundamental procedural error standard)