Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Aluma-Lopez v. Gonzales
Citation: 158 F. App'x 905Docket: No. 03-74243; Agency No. A72-338-056
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; December 15, 2005; Federal Appellate Court
Ricardo Aluma-Lopez, a Colombian national, seeks judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) denial of his asylum and withholding of removal application. His asylum application was submitted beyond the one-year deadline specified in 8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(2)(B). However, neither the Immigration Judge (IJ) nor the BIA explicitly addressed the issue of timeliness, and the government did not challenge it. As a result, it is assumed that the BIA's decision was made on the merits, which is subject to judicial review. The IJ and BIA failed to consider whether Aluma, who acted as a drug informant for the U.S. government against a Colombian drug cartel, would face persecution due to an imputed political opinion. The relationship between U.S. policy on Colombian drug trafficking and imputed political opinions remains an ambiguous area of immigration law. Therefore, the case is remanded for the BIA to evaluate whether Aluma's potential persecution qualifies as being on account of an imputed political opinion under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). The memorandum notes that this disposition is not suitable for publication and cannot be cited in this circuit's courts except as permitted by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.