Tsegmed v. Sessions, 859 F.3d 480

Tsegmed, a Mongolian national, overstayed a nonimmigrant visa and has lived in the U.S. since 2004; placed in removal proceedings after DUI arrests in Illinois.
He applied in July 2008 for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection; IJ denied relief in 2014 and the BIA affirmed in 2015.
Alleged past harms: arrests (1989, 1994), beatings and 72-hour detentions without food, threats and harassment tied to pro-democracy activity and Democratic Party membership, mysterious deaths of his son (1999) and brother (2007), and the framing and death of his friend Bayarbat.
IJ found Tsegmed credible but noted lack of corroboration; BIA and IJ concluded he missed the one-year asylum filing deadline and did not show changed or extraordinary circumstances excusing delay.
On withholding and CAT, the agency found the harms did not rise to past persecution and that he failed to show it was more likely than not he would face future persecution or torture if returned to Mongolia.

Issue	Tsegmed's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction over asylum timeliness exception	Evidence of material change/extraordinary circumstances excuses one-year filing bar	Timeliness exceptions are factual; §1252 bars judicial review except for legal/constitutional claims	Court lacks jurisdiction to review BIA’s timeliness finding; denial of asylum not reviewable here
Withholding of removal (past persecution)	Arrests, beatings, interrogations, and relatives’ deaths amount to past persecution on account of political opinion/membership	Record does not compel finding of past persecution; key incidents uncorroborated or not shown to target him for politics	Substantial-evidence review: BIA’s denial of past persecution upheld; not compelled to reverse
Withholding of removal (future persecution)	Given past targeting and continuing threats, he will likely be persecuted if returned	Mongolia’s political situation changed; Democratic Party in power; no recent evidence Communist Party can/will target him	IJ’s finding that he failed to show “more likely than not” future persecution upheld
CAT protection	Same evidence establishes it’s more likely than not he’d be tortured	Claim insufficiently argued and unsupported by record showing state-sponsored torture risk	Claim forfeited by inadequate briefing; even on merits, evidence doesn’t compel CAT relief

N.L.A. v. Holder, 744 F.3d 425 (7th Cir.) (review of IJ and BIA when BIA issues written opinion)
Abdoulaye v. Holder, 721 F.3d 485 (7th Cir.) (substantial-evidence standard for factual review)
Bitsin v. Holder, 719 F.3d 619 (7th Cir.) (limits on judicial review of timeliness exceptions; legal-question exception scope)
Viracacha v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 511 (7th Cir.) (one-year exception review limitations)
Restrepo v. Holder, 610 F.3d 962 (7th Cir.) (defining legal-question exception)
Dandan v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 567 (7th Cir.) (standard for reversing BIA factual findings)
Halim v. Holder, 755 F.3d 506 (7th Cir.) (definition of persecution and standards for withholding)
Yi Xian Chen v. Holder, 705 F.3d 624 (7th Cir.) (examples of persecution and analysis)
Stanojkova v. Holder, 645 F.3d 943 (7th Cir.) (clarifying persecution versus harassment)
Prela v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 515 (7th Cir.) (difference between asylum and withholding standards)
Vaduva v. INS, 131 F.3d 689 (7th Cir.) (past persecution findings and asylum denial)
Sirbu v. Holder, 718 F.3d 655 (7th Cir.) (deference in close past-persecution cases)
Puffer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 675 F.3d 709 (7th Cir.) (failure to brief an issue forfeits appellate review)