Ranjit Ghotra v. Jefferson Sessions , 703 F. App'x 547 ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RANJIT SINGH GHOTRA, No. 15-73146
Petitioner, Agency No. A088-734-492
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 15, 2017**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Ranjit Singh Ghotra, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen
removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
In assessing Ghotra’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the BIA did
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
not have the benefit of Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351 (9th Cir. 2017),
which holds that the “one central reason” standard applies to asylum but not to
withholding of removal. In addition, the BIA did not address whether the proposed
particular social group was cognizable. Because the BIA’s rejection of Ghotra’s
ineffective assistance claim relies in part on the agency’s underlying denial of
withholding of removal for failure to show “one central reason” and because the
BIA did not address whether Ghotra’s proposed particular social group is
cognizable, we remand for the BIA to address his ineffective assistance claim.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
2 15-73146