Jimmy Tahir 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JIMMY TAHIR,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-74943
Agency No. A095-635-866
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 16, 2010**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Jimmy Tahir, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
FILED
NOV 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

07-74943 2
8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence. Wakkary v. Holder, 558
F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for
review, and we remand.
The agency denied Tahir’s asylum application claim as time barred. Tahir
does not challenge this finding in his opening brief.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Tahir failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured if returned to
Indonesia. See id. at 1067-68.
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s finding that Tahir did not
suffer past persecution because the three incidents when fireworks were set outside
his home and the one bomb threat against his church, considered individually or
cumulatively, do not constitute persecution. See id. at 1059-60. Moreover, the
record also does not compel the conclusion that Tahir demonstrated a pattern or
practice of persecution against Christians in Indonesia. See id. at 1060-62.
However, the agency found Tahir failed to demonstrate a clear probability of
persecution on account of his Christian religion based on what occurred to him. In
reaching this conclusion, the agency did not apply the disfavored group analysis.
In light of our intervening decision in Tampubolon v. Holder, 610 F.3d 1056, 1062
(9th Cir. 2010), we remand for the agency to assess Tahir’s withholding of removal

-- 2 of 3 --

07-74943 3
claim under the disfavored group analysis in the first instance. See Wakkary, 558
F.3d at 1067; see also INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --