633 F. App'x 336
7th Cir.2015Background
- Narayan Khatri Chetri, a Nepalese citizen and local Nepali Congress Party secretary, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection after entering the U.S. in 2011.
- In April 2008 he was abducted and beaten by 20–25 assailants identified by him as Maoist YCL members; he required hospital treatment and stitches but returned to political activity thereafter.
- In June 2010 he alleges an anonymous phone threat from a Maoist district secretary demanding he join the Maoist Party or face “physical actions”; he fled Nepal soon after and did not report that call to police.
- An IJ found him generally credible but concluded the 2008 attack and 2010 threat did not amount to persecution and that Nepalese authorities were not unwilling or unable to protect him; the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed.
- Country‑conditions evidence and State Department reporting showed Maoists’ political integration and increasing political stability; Chetri offered limited evidence that the government was unable or unwilling to protect him.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether past harm rises to persecution | Chetri: 2008 abduction, beatings, chest stabbings and hospital treatment constitute persecution | Government: injuries, though serious, fall short of persecution precedent | Court: No persecution; substantial evidence supports IJ (harm not severe enough) |
| Whether 2010 phone call was an immediate, menacing threat | Chetri: call demanding he join Maoists or face "physical actions" showed imminent danger | Government: call vague, remote in time from 2008 incident, insufficiently menacing | Court: Call not sufficiently immediate/menacing to be persecution |
| Whether Nepalese government is unwilling/unable to protect | Chetri: police ineffective; prior failure to arrest shows unwillingness or inability | Government: police investigated 2008 attack when prompted; political authorities could provide protection | Court: Substantial evidence that government not shown unwilling/unable to protect |
| Eligibility for withholding of removal and CAT relief | Chetri: past or feared persecution supports withholding/CAT | Government: inability to meet asylum standard precludes withholding; no evidence of torture by state | Court: Denied withholding and CAT relief (asylum not established; no state‑acquiesced torture shown) |
Key Cases Cited
- Mekhtiev v. Holder, 559 F.3d 725 (7th Cir.) (holding certain beatings and injuries did not constitute past persecution)
- Mema v. Gonzales, 474 F.3d 412 (7th Cir.) (abduction and severe beating did not amount to persecution)
- Zhu v. Gonzales, 465 F.3d 316 (7th Cir.) (officials’ physical assaults insufficient for past persecution)
- Bejko v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 482 (7th Cir.) (threats constitute persecution only in extreme circumstances)
- Soumare v. Mukasey, 525 F.3d 547 (7th Cir.) (failure to meet asylum standard precludes withholding of removal)