Ritonga v. Holder
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 1761
| 10th Cir. | 2011Background
- Ritonga, a Christian from Indonesia, faced religious hostility and violence including 1998 riots targeting Christians.
- In 2000, attackers entered Ritonga's home, stole property, and injured her; police apprehended the assailants.
- In 2001, assailants with a Christian symbol attacked her car but she sustained no injury.
- She travelled to the U.S. several times and overstayed her nonimmigrant visa, remaining in the U.S. since 2001.
- She filed for asylum, restriction on removal, and CAT protection in June 2002; the IJ found credibility issues but the BIA denied relief on the merits.
- The BIA and IJ concluded, after review, that Ritonga failed to prove past persecution or a well-founded fear, and the CAT claim lacked support.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ritonga proved past persecution or well-founded fear for asylum | Ritonga asserts cumulative violence and targeted acts show persecution | BIA found no past persecution or well-founded fear given evidence and countervailing factors | Past persecution and well-founded fear not established |
| Whether the record supports a pattern or practice of persecution of Christians in Indonesia | Record shows ongoing persecution of Christians | State reports show limited persecution; government sometimes prosecutes perpetrators | No substantial evidence of a country-wide pattern or practice |
| Whether Ritonga is eligible for restriction on removal | If asylum is denied, restriction on removal should be considered | Restriction on removal requires asylum-type eligibility; not satisfied | Denied because asylum denied; restriction on removal denied |
| Whether Ritonga's CAT claim was properly analyzed separately from INA claims | CAT relief separate claim asserting risk of torture | BIA properly applied CAT standard independent of asylum; evidence insufficient | CAT relief denied |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial on the merits | BIA failed to provide independent analysis beyond the IJ's findings | BIA's analysis and factual determinations are supported by the record | BIA denial affirmed; substantial evidence supports decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Witjaksono v. Holder, 573 F.3d 968 (10th Cir. 2009) (considering cumulative incidents to assess persecution and affirming denial when not shown persecutory threshold)
- Sidabutar v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 1116 (10th Cir. 2007) (discusses standards for asylum and persecution claims in Indonesia)
- Uanreroro v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 1197 (10th Cir. 2006) (finality of BIA decisions; framework for review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a))
- Tulengkey v. Gonzales, 425 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2005) (pattern or practice of persecution and relocation within country considerations)
- Wiransane v. Ashcroft, 366 F.3d 889 (10th Cir. 2004) (definition of persecution and government/influence factors)