Blood feuds and timeliness

Spaqi v. Holder, Nos. 09-4442/4444 (6th Cir. Dec. 21, 2011) (unpublished).

In this Kosovar asylum claim, the family sought asylum based on a blood feud.  The court found that the fear of the blood feud was a personal problem unconnected to politics and therefore not a basis for asylum or withholding of removal. 

The lead applicant was disqualified from asylum because of his murder conviction relating to the blood feud.  When this became apparent, the family's attorney sought to sever the wife and kids from his case, but the request came too late in the proceedings.  The ground of ineligibility for the principal should have been apparent.  Also, the family did not establish prima facie eligibility.

The oldest child turned 21 a few days after the family entered and a few days before the principal filed his I-589.  He had to file his application but by the time it was filed, it was one month past the one year deadline.  The majority declined to review the timeliness determination because it found that the family was not eligible for relief.

The partial dissent would have remanded on the one-year issue because there is some indication in the record that the BIA failed to consider the transcript from the father's separate proceedings, which suggested that the oldest child was given permission to file late.  The BIA failed to review the complete record and got some of the key facts wrong.  It suggested a due process violation.  The partial dissent would have also found that the family constituted a particular social group.