Pramesh K. C. Maharaj v. Eric Holder

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PRAMESH K. C. MAHARAJ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC HOLDER,
Respondent,
No. 12-71006
Agency No. A073-123-391
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted September 11, 2013
San Francisco, California
Before: SCHROEDER and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and BEISTLINE, ** Chief
District Judge.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a). We review de novo the
BIA’s and IJ’s determinations of purely legal questions, and we review their
FILED
SEP 24 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The Honorable Ralph R. Beistline, United States District Judge for the
District of Alaska, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

factual findings for substantial evidence. Ali v. Holder, 637 F.3d 1025, 1028-29
(9th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, we decide whether to grant or deny the petition for
review based on the BIA’s or IJ’s reasoning rather than our own independent
analysis of the record. Id. at 1029.
We find that substantial evidence supported the determination that Maharaj
failed to establish a clear probability of future torture, and that the BIA and the IJ
adequately conducted an individualized analysis. There was no due process error
in the IJ’s handling of the case.
The Petition is DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --