Mariam Melkonyan v. Jefferson Sessions
698 F. App'x 494
9th Cir.2017Background
- Petitioner Mariam Melkonyan, an Armenian national, appealed the BIA’s dismissal of her asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims after an IJ denied relief.
- Central factual claim: Melkonyan alleged her husband died under suspicious circumstances and that she feared persecution/torture if returned to Armenia.
- The IJ found Melkonyan not credible based on demeanor and lack of corroboration of her husband’s death and any foul play.
- The IJ also determined Melkonyan knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application after providing explanations the IJ rejected.
- The BIA affirmed; Melkonyan challenged the adverse credibility finding, denial of relief, the frivolous-application finding, and alleged due process violations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adverse credibility determination | Melkonyan argued her testimony was credible and explanations for lack of corroboration were adequate | Agency argued demeanor and failure to corroborate husband’s death/foul play supported disbelief | Court: Substantial evidence supports adverse credibility based on demeanor and lack of corroboration |
| Withholding of removal/asylum | Melkonyan argued she met burden based on her testimony about persecution risk | Government argued claims rest on testimony the agency found not credible and lacked corroboration | Court: Claims fail without credible testimony |
| CAT protection | Melkonyan argued likely torture on return based on same facts | Government argued no other record evidence showing torture by or with consent/acquiescence of officials | Court: CAT claim fails because it relies on non-credible testimony and no other supporting evidence |
| Frivolous asylum application & due process | Melkonyan contended IJ/BIA erred in finding frivolous and violated due process | Government argued IJ complied with In re Y-L- procedural requirements and gave chance to explain; evidence shows knowingly frivolous filing | Court: Finding of knowingly frivolous application upheld; no due process violation shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2010) (REAL ID Act standards for adverse credibility review)
- Huang v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2014) (deference to demeanor-based credibility findings)
- Bhattarai v. Lynch, 835 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2016) (requirements for adverse credibility findings based on lack of corroboration)
- Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2007) (agency not required to adopt petitioner’s interpretation of evidence)
- Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2003) (failure of asylum/withholding claims when testimony not credible)
- Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir. 2000) (standard for immigration due process errors)
- Ahir v. Mukasey, 527 F.3d 912 (9th Cir. 2008) (standard for finding knowingly frivolous asylum applications)
- Kulakchyan v. Holder, 730 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2013) (review standard for frivolous-application determinations)
- Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2010) (de novo review of due process claims)