Case: 19-60763 Document: 00516393142 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/13/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 13, 2022 No. 19-60763 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Mohamed Lamin Leslie A. Gordon, also known as Mohamed Gordon, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A061 140 813 Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Mohamed Gordon, an immigrant from Sierra Leone, was ordered removed from the United States in 2018 based on convictions for controlled substance offenses. In an effort to prevent his removal, he applied for asylum, statutory withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-60763 Document: 00516393142 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/13/2022 No. 19-60763 Against Torture (CAT). After both the Immigration Judge (IJ) and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denied Gordon’s claims, he filed a petition for review. We dismiss the petition in part for lack of jurisdiction and deny it in part. I. Gordon was admitted to the United States in March 2010 as a lawful permanent resident. In August 2018, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings because Gordon committed drug crimes. At his removal hearing, Gordon conceded his removability but sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. In his asylum application, Gordon stated that members of the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone killed his father in 1994, during Sierra Leone’s civil war. He stated that they killed six other relatives five years later, and he narrowly escaped being killed himself. He submitted documentation regarding human rights violations and country conditions in Sierra Leone, and claimed that he feared harm if returned there. After a removal hearing, the IJ denied Gordon’s claims. Gordon appealed to the BIA, which also rejected his claims. As relevant to this appeal, the BIA found that Gordon had not established a nexus between any past persecution—or future fear of persecution—and a protected ground under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Gordon filed a timely petition for review of the BIA’s decision. II. “To succeed on an application for asylum, an applicant must show that she is unable or unwilling to return to and avail herself of the protection of her home country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, nationality, membership in a particular social 2 Case: 19-60763 Document: 00516393142 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/13/2022 No. 19-60763 group, or political opinion.” Jaco v. Garland, 24 F.4th 395, 401 (5th Cir. 2021) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted); see 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). Gordon challenges the BIA’s determination that there was no “nexus” between Gordon’s persecution and a protected ground—that is, that Gordon lacked a well-founded fear of persecution on account …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals