Hasudungan Napitupulu 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
HASUDUNGAN NAPITUPULU,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-71908
Agency No. A096-496-849
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 24, 2013**
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Hasudungan Napitupulu, 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. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
FILED
JUL 31 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-71908 2
evidence the agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056
(9th Cir. 2009). We grant the petition for review and we remand.
The BIA stated the incidents of harm Napitupulu suffered “involved no
physical harm.” This is not supported by the record. Napitupulu testified that in
one incident he was attacked and beaten by his co-workers, he fell to the ground,
and it took him ten days to recover. Because it is not clear the BIA considered this
incident in evaluating Napitupulu’s withholding of removal claim under a
disfavored group analysis, we remand to the agency to do so in the first instance.
See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
We do not address Napitupulu’s contention that he suffered past persecution
because the court previously rejected it. See Napitupulu v. Holder, No. 07-74120,
2010 WL 2990836 (9th Cir. July 29, 2010).
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --