CA9 on Clear Error: Ridor v. Holder

"Ridore argues that the BIA acted beyond the scope of its authority under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3) by reviewing the IJ’s findings under a de novo rather than clear error standard and improperly engaging in its own factfinding.  We agree that the BIA committed legal error in vacating the IJ’s decision with respect to the CAT protection claim, and therefore grant Ridore’s petition and remand to the BIA to review the IJ’s CAT findings applying the clear error standard." - Ridor v. Holder, Oct. 3, 2012.  [Hats off to Kari E. Hong!]