Purnomo Suseko v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
JLA/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PURNOMO SUSEKO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 06-70922
Agency No. A096-345-430
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 11, 2010**
Before: BEEZER, TROTT, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Purnomo Suseko, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of a
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
FILED
JAN 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

JLA/Research 06-70922 2
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review factual findings for substantial evidence.
Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that the presumption
that Suseko is eligible for withholding of removal is rebutted by fundamental
changed circumstances, see 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(1)(i)(A), because the BIA’s
analysis of the State Department report was sufficiently individualized and its
resolution of potentially contradictory statements in the report was rational, see
Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 998-99 (9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Suseko has failed to show, as a moderate Muslim, that it is more likely than not
that he will be tortured if returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d
1049, 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --