Two Not-Precedential Decisions On Asylum

"FV" v. Gonzales, No. 05-2640, not precedential, July 11, 2006: IJ and BIA must rule on asylum-seeker's claim that status as wealthy Colombian is a particular social group that qualifies for asylum. It was improper to deny the asylum claim while ignoring the argument that being a wealthy Colombian is a particular social group. Silence by the IJ and BIA on that theory requires remanding to allow them to rule on the issue first.

"NE" v. Gonzales, No 05-3063, not precedential, July 13, 2006: IJ's denial of asylum overturned because it was not supported by substantial evidence where IJ failed to discuss death threat against the asylum-seeker except in a vague reference to it as a letter the asylum-seeker received. Although an IJ conceivably could discredit what on its face seems to be a major death threat, the IJ must set forth reasons for doing so, not merely to dismiss the claim without evaluating or discussing what seems to be a very important piece of evidence.