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.
Akopian v. Gonzales
Citation: 196 F. App'x 503Docket: No. 05-70014
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; August 2, 2006; Federal Appellate Court
Alexander Akopian, a native of Azerbaijan and citizen of Armenia, sought review of the denial of his asylum application, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA affirmed the Immigration Judge's (IJ) findings without opinion, leading to a review based on substantial evidence. The IJ concluded that Akopian did not demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on a protected ground, as defined under U.S. law. Akopian's five-day detention while being investigated for murder was deemed insufficient to establish persecution, reflecting the precedent that persecution is an extreme measure, not merely any offensive treatment. His claims of discrimination due to his inability to speak Armenian were similarly found to fall short of the persecution threshold. Notably, he had not experienced any alleged persecution during the last three years in Armenia, and his family remains there. The standard for withholding of removal is more stringent than that for asylum, and since his asylum petition was denied, the withholding of removal claim was also rejected. Akopian's request for protection under the Convention Against Torture failed as he could not prove it was "more likely than not" that he would face a specific threat of torture if returned to Armenia. Consequently, the petition for review was denied, and the decision is not suitable for publication or citation within the circuit, as per the relevant rules.