United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Immigration — asylum
Where the BIA ignored evidence that an alien’s persecution was the result of political, as well as personal reasons, the denial of asylum must be reversed.
“We have repeatedly held that an applicant is entitled to a reasoned analysis of his case, ‘not one which wholly ignores or disregards relevant, probative evidence.’ Gjerazi, 435 F.3d at 813; see also Mohideen, 416 F.3d at 571. In concluding that Mustafa’s attackers were motivated simply by a personal dispute, the immigration judge and the Board erred in disregarding evidence in the record that the attackers acted with mixed motives. This case presents a unique set of facts that ultimately compel the conclusion that Mustafa’s attackers were motivated in part by an anti-PML-N political opinion they attributed to him. Mustafa is therefore entitled to a presumption in favor of granting asylum. On remand, the government will have the opportunity to rebut that presumption by proving that ‘[t]here has been a fundamental change in circumstances such that [he] no longer has a well-founded fear of persecution’ or that he ‘could avoid persecution by relocating to another part of” Pakistan if “it would be reasonable to expect [him] to do so.’ 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(i).”
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Flaum, J.