Otgonbat Serjeedorj v. Jeff Sessions
681 F. App'x 470
6th Cir.2017Background
- Petitioner Otgonbat Serjeedorj, a Mongolian national who overstayed a visa after coming to the U.S. in 1999, was placed in removal proceedings and sought asylum, withholding of removal, CAT protection, and voluntary departure.
- He testified he opposed government corruption in Mongolia as a player/coach on a government baseball team; he alleged two arrests in 1999 and a severe police beating on the second arrest causing hospitalization and injuries.
- The Immigration Judge (IJ) found the asylum application untimely and denied asylum, withholding, CAT protection, and voluntary departure, citing lack of credibility and inadequate corroboration.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) disagreed with the IJ’s adverse credibility finding (concluding only exaggeration of injuries) but agreed relief was not established and denied Serjeedorj’s motion to reopen.
- Serjeedorj appealed the BIA orders, abandoned his asylum and reopening claims on appeal, and raised claims about withholding/CAT, lack of opportunity to corroborate, single-judge BIA decision, and facilitation of return if removed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirement to provide corroboration / notice to explain lack of corroboration | Serjeedorj: he was not given notice or opportunity to supply or explain missing corroboration | Government: corroboration may be required; IJ identified documentary problems and available corroboration Serjeedorj failed to provide | BIA/IJ properly required corroboration; petitioner had opportunity and failed to reasonably obtain or translate corroborating evidence, so claim fails |
| Withholding of removal / CAT — likelihood of future persecution or torture | Serjeedorj: past arrests and severe beating show risk of future persecution/torture due to opposition to corruption | Government: the incident did not rise to persecution/torture and no showing of future risk | Court: incident did not constitute past persecution; petitioner failed to show likelihood of future persecution or torture; withholding and CAT denied |
| Single-judge BIA consideration | Serjeedorj: initial BIA decision should have been issued by a three-judge panel | Government: no prejudice shown from single-judge disposition | Court: petitioner showed no prejudice; no relief granted |
| Voluntary departure denial / transcript citation | Serjeedorj: BIA failed to reference every transcript page regarding voluntary departure | Government: decision not reviewable | Court: Court lacks jurisdiction to review discretionary voluntary departure denial; claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Hachem v. Holder, 656 F.3d 430 (6th Cir. 2011) (abandonded claims not reviewed)
- Vasha v. Gonzales, 410 F.3d 863 (6th Cir. 2005) (no relief absent demonstrated prejudice from panel composition)
- Gaye v. Lynch, 788 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2015) (no entitlement to pre-notice of specific corroborating evidence)
- Urbina-Mejia v. Holder, 597 F.3d 360 (6th Cir. 2010) (corroboration may be required when reasonably available)
- Lin v. Holder, 565 F.3d 971 (6th Cir. 2009) (review standard for corroboration unavailability)
- Fang Huang v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 640 (6th Cir. 2008) (standard for withholding: more likely than not)
- Kaba v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 741 (6th Cir. 2008) (CAT standard: likelihood of torture)
- Pilica v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 941 (6th Cir. 2004) (detention and beating causing hospitalization may nevertheless fall short of past persecution)
- Abu-Khaliel v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 627 (6th Cir. 2006) (no jurisdiction to review voluntary departure discretionary determinations)