Vonny Juliana 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
VONNY JULIANA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71491
Agency No. A097-620-793
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 19, 2010**
Before: B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Vonny Juliana, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration
judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
FILED
JUL 29 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-71491 2
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence. Wakkary v. Holder,
558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review in part, grant
in part, and remand.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Juliana failed to show it is more likely than not that she would be tortured if
removed to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68.
In assessing Juliana’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, the agency
only considered the incidents of harm she suffered on account of her Chinese
ethnicity, and did not consider the harms she suffered on account of her
Christianity. Because the agency has not considered the cumulative impact of
these harms in assessing relief, we remand Juliana’s asylum and withholding of
removal claims for the agency to consider in the first instance. See INS v. Ventura,
537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam); see also Tampubolon v. Holder, 598 F.3d
521, 526 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[A]ny reasonable factfinder would be compelled to
conclude on this record that Christian Indonesians are a disfavored group.”).
Each party shall bear their own costs on appeal.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --