Saqer Salman v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., 687 F.3d 991

Saqer Salman, an Israeli citizen, seeks asylum and withholding of removal; BIA denied and Salman petitions for review.
Salman entered the U.S. as a nonimmigrant in 2005 after his uncle was murdered; Faroney family implicated in the crime.
Salman testified in Israel in December 2005; Faroney relatives were convicted; Salman returned to the U.S. in 2006.
Israeli police arrested Faroney and his father within a year; Faroney’s murder conviction suggests state protection.
Salman’s asylum claim relies on fear of private harassment by the Faroney family; he contends Israel cannot/protect him due to Arabic descent.
The IJ and BIA denied asylum and withholding, and denied Salman’s motion to reopen/remand; Salman appeals the two rejections.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Salman showed fear of persecution by private actors with government condonation	Salman argues government unable/unwilling to protect him	Israel protected victims; not shown government condonation or helplessness	IJ did not err; denial upheld
Whether the BIA abused its discretion in denying reopening/remand with new expert evidence	New expert report on Arab clan culture should be considered	Evidence was not previously unavailable; disfavored to reopen	No due process error; motion to reopen/remand denied

Menjivar v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d 918 (8th Cir. 2005) (persecution by private actors requires state condonation or helplessness to protect)
Hassan v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 661 (8th Cir. 2004) (de novo review with deference to BIA interpretations; substantial evidence standard)
Feleke v. INS, 118 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 1997) (burden to show well-founded fear on enumerated grounds)
Gebremaria v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 734 (8th Cir. 2004) (motion to reopen: criteria for previously unavailable evidence; public policy against endless proceedings)
Lopez v. Heinauer, 332 F.3d 507 (8th Cir. 2003) (due process considerations in asylum proceedings)