20-3950 Giron-Salinas v. Garland BIA Bain, IJ A206 022 354 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second 2 Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley 3 Square, in the City of New York, on the 15th day of June, two thousand twenty- 4 three. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 8 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 9 RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, 10 MYRNA PÉREZ, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 JAIRON NEHEMIAS GIRON-SALINAS, 15 16 Petitioner, 17 18 v. 20-3950 19 NAC 20 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 22 23 Respondent. 24 _____________________________________ 25 1 For Petitioner: Nicholas John Mundy, Brooklyn, NY. 2 3 For Respondent: Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant Attorney 4 General; Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director; 5 Susan Bennett Green, Senior Litigation 6 Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, 7 United States Department of Justice, 8 Washington, DC. 9 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of 10 Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND 11 DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. 12 Jairon Nehemias Giron-Salinas, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks 13 review of a decision of the BIA that reversed a decision of an Immigration Judge 14 (“IJ”) and denied his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and 15 protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Jairon Nehemias 16 Giron-Salinas, No. A206 022 354 (B.I.A. Nov. 9, 2020), rev’g No. A206 022 354 17 (Immig. Ct. N.Y.C. June 19, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 18 underlying facts and procedural history. 19 When the BIA reverses an IJ’s grant of relief, we review the BIA’s decision 20 as the final agency determination. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d 21 Cir. 2005). We review the agency’s findings of fact for substantial evidence and 2 1 conclusions of law de novo. See id.; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (“[T]he 2 administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator 3 would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.”). 4 I. Jurisdiction 5 As an initial matter, we decline to consider Giron-Salinas’s jurisdictional 6 argument, which was not raised before the BIA. Lin Zhong v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 7 480 F.3d 104, 123 (2d Cir. 2007) (“[U]sually . . . issues not raised to the BIA will not 8 …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals