Bety Lnu; Irwin Lnu v. Attorney General of the United States

*Honorable David R. Hansen, Senior Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals, sitting by designation.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 06-2685
___________
BETY LNU; IRWIN LNU,
Petitioners
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Respondent
___________
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
(Nos. A96-252-504 and A96-252-505)
Immigration Judge: Hon. Miriam K. Mills
___________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
April 10, 2007
Before: SMITH, NYGAARD, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.*
(Filed: April 20, 2007)
___________

-- 1 of 4 --

1. Bety’s husband, Irwin, did not file his own petition for relief and instead sought
relief pursuant to his wife’s filing.
2
OPINION OF THE COURT
___________
NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.
I.
Bety, an ethnic Chinese, Indonesian citizen, entered the United States on a visitor’s
visa and remained in the United States beyond the expiration of her visa. She was ordered
to appear before an immigration court, where she claimed that, over the course of several
years, native Indonesians looted her father’s business, sexually assaulted her, and robbed
her and her husband. The Immigration Judge denied her requests for asylum and
withholding, and the BIA denied her subsequent appeal. We will deny her petition for
review.1
II.
Where, as here, the BIA summarily affirms the IJ’s decision, we review the IJ’s
decision directly. We will uphold the IJ’s findings if they are supported by “reasonable,
substantial and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Guo v. Ashcroft,
386 F.3d 556, 561 (3d Cir. 2004).

-- 2 of 4 --

3
III.
A.
The Attorney General may grant asylum to an alien who shows she is unable or
unwilling to return to her homeland because of past persecution or a well-founded fear of
future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular
social group, or political opinion. Lie v. Ashcroft, 396 F.3d 530, 534-35 (3d Cir. 2005).
The Immigration Judge concluded Bety’s complaints related only to sporadic, ordinary
criminal acts, or bullying by other children. Moreover, as the IJ noted, the latest State
Department Country Reports do not indicate that there is systematic, pervasive, or
organized persecution of Chinese women. With respect to her alleged fear of future
persecution, the IJ pointed out that her husband failed to corroborate her claims, and that
her family has remained in Indonesia unharmed since she left for the United States. This
latter fact diminished the reasonableness of her fear of future persecution in Indonesia.
Lie, 396 F.3d at 537. We conclude the IJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence.
B.
To obtain withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, an
alien must show a clear probability that her life would be threatened on account of her
race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular group, or political opinion. The IJ
concluded Bety was victim to ordinary criminal acts and bullying, not persecution on

-- 3 of 4 --

4
account of her race, nationality or religion. Again, we conclude the IJ’s findings were
supported by substantial evidence.
C.
To obtain protection from removal under the Convention Against Torture, an
applicant must show that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if
removed to the proposed country of removal. Sevoian v. Ashcroft, 290 F.3d 166, 175 (3d
Cir. 2002). The CAT defines torture as:
any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is
intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him
or her or a third person information or a confession, punishing him or her
for an act he or she or a third person has committed or is suspected of
having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or her or a third person,
or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or
suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official
capacity.
8 C.F.R. §208.18(a)(1) (2007). Bety failed to show any evidence that she would be
subjected to torture by, or with the acquiescence of, public officials in Indonesia.
IV.
We conclude the Immigration Judge’s decision to deny Bety asylum and
withholding of removal under both the INA and CAT was supported by substantial
evidence. Accordingly, we will deny Bety’s petition for review.

-- 4 of 4 --