Yuddy Hartono, a.k.a. Christophorus 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
YUDDY HARTONO, a.k.a.
Christophorus,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72073
Agency No. A099-824-474
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 13, 2012**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Yuddy Hartono, 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
FILED
NOV 19 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

10-72073 2
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence the
agency’s factual findings, Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009),
we deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and remand for further
proceedings.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of CAT relief because
Hartono failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be tortured if
returned to Indonesia. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067-68. Accordingly, Hartono’s
CAT claim fails.
With respect to asylum and withholding of removal, Hartono alleges native
Indonesian youths repeatedly beat him, and, while in high school, a native
Indonesian youth broke his nose and a mob of Muslims attacked him, beat him
with a metal pipe and wooden stick, and burned his chest with cigarettes.
Substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s finding that these experiences do
not rise to the level of persecution. See Mamouzian v. Ashcroft, 390 F.3d 1129,
1134 (9th Cir. 2004) (“We have consistently found persecution where, as here, the
petitioner was physically harmed . . . [particularly where] such harm was inflicted
on more than one occasion over a period of years . . . .”) (internal citation omitted);
Baballah v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1067, 1076 (9th Cir. 2004). If Hartono is able to

-- 2 of 3 --

10-72073 3
establish past persecution, he is entitled to a presumption of a well-founded fear of
future persecution. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1). Accordingly, we grant the petition
for review as to Hartono’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, and we
remand to the agency for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See
INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam). We also remand for the
agency to address Hartono’s argument that he faces persecution on account of an
imputed political opinion. See id.
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --