NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED JUN 30 2023 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GABRIELA LIZBETH BENITEZ No. 22-375 LORENZO and KEYSHA MELINA Agency Nos. GARDUNO BENITEZ, A206-270-354, A206-270-355 Petitioners, MEMORANDUM* v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 5, 2023** Pasadena, California Before: M. SMITH, HAMILTON,*** and COLLINS, Circuit Judges. Petitioners Gabriela Lizbeth Benitez Lorenzo and her daughter Keysha Melina Garduno Benitez are citizens of Mexico who entered the United States in 2014. When the Department of Homeland Security charged petitioners in * 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). *** The Honorable David F. Hamilton, United States Circuit Judge for the Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation. 2016 with being in the United States without valid entry documents, petitioners admitted they were removable but applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (CAT). An Immigration Judge (IJ) denied their applications and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed their appeal of that denial. Petitioners now seek review of the BIA’s decision as to withholding of removal and CAT protection. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition. Lorenzo and her daughter are from Guerrero, Mexico. They fled their home out of fear of violence perpetrated by people they believe were drug traffickers. Lorenzo testified that neither she nor her daughter was ever a victim of or witness to criminal activity, but several family members were. Taxi drivers, including Lorenzo’s husband, had their routes restricted by unknown individuals, presumed to be drug traffickers, who barred them from driving in certain areas. Lorenzo’s mother owned a small business and was extorted for payments from unknown individuals, also presumed to be drug traffickers. Based on these incidents, Lorenzo fled with her infant daughter. After petitioners arrived in the United States, Lorenzo’s uncle and her cousin’s husband were killed by unknown individuals for unknown reasons. The BIA found no error in the IJ’s decision to deny relief and incorporated portions of that decision as its own. We review the Board’s decision as well as the portions of the IJ’s opinion that the BIA incorporated. 2 22-375 Medina-Lara v. Holder, 771 F.3d 1106, 1111 (9th Cir. 2014). We treat the agency’s factual findings as conclusive “unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). We review de novo the Board’s determinations of law. Diaz-Reynoso v. Barr, 968 F.3d 1070, 1076 (9th Cir. 2020). I. Withholding of Removal Before this court, petitioners argue membership in the alleged particular social group of “victims or witness[es] to criminal activity within their familial unit that fear future harm” qualifies them …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals