Yodi Hilco Balti Huliselian 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
YODI HILCO BALTI HULISELIAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-71878
Agency No. A095-634-524
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Yodi Hilco Balti Huliselian, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) 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”).
FILED
JAN 21 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-71878 2
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review factual findings for
substantial evidence, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009), and
we deny the petition for review.
The BIA denied Huliselian’s asylum claim as time-barred. Huliselian does
not challenge this finding in his opening brief.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Huliselian failed
to demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be persecuted based on the harms
inflicted upon his uncles. See Arriaga-Barrientos v. INS, 937 F.2d 411, 414 (9th
Cir. 1991) (requiring “pattern of persecution closely tied to the petitioner” where
violence against family members is basis of claim). Accordingly, Huliselian’s
withholding of removal claim fails.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of Huliselian’s CAT
claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured
if returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1068.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --