17-579 Sanchez-Ponce v. Whitaker BIA Kolbe, IJ A208 283 836/837 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 TO 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 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United 3 States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, 4 on the 30th day of November, two thousand eighteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 PIERRE N. LEVAL, 8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 9 CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 KAREN BEATRICE SANCHEZ-PONCE, 14 DAVID ALBERTO PACAS-SANCHEZ, 15 Petitioners, 16 17 v. 17-579 18 NAC 19 MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, ACTING 20 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONERS: Anne Pilsbury, Central American 25 Legal Assistance, Brooklyn, NY. 26 27 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 28 Attorney General; Anthony C. 1 Payne, Assistant Director; Yedidya 2 Cohen, Trial Attorney, Office of 3 Immigration Litigation, United 4 States Department of Justice, 5 Washington, DC. 6 7 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 8 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 9 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 10 is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. 11 Petitioners Karen Beatrice Sanchez-Ponce and her son, 12 David Alberto Pacas-Sanchez, natives and citizens of El 13 Salvador, seek review of a February 9, 2017, decision of the 14 BIA affirming a September 8, 2016, decision of an Immigration 15 Judge (“IJ”) denying Sanchez-Ponce’s application for asylum, 16 withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention 17 Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Karen Beatrice Sanchez-Ponce, 18 David Alberto Pacas-Sanchez, Nos. A 208 283 836/837 (B.I.A. 19 Feb. 9, 2017), aff’g Nos. A 208 283 836/837 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. 20 City Sept. 8, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with 21 the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 22 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed 23 both the BIA’s and IJ’s decisions “for the sake of 24 completeness.” Wangchuck v. DHS, 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2 1 2006). The applicable standards of review are well 2 established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Paloka v. Holder, 3 762 F.3d 191, 195 (2d Cir. 2014). 4 I. Asylum and Withholding 5 To demonstrate eligibility for asylum and withholding of 6 removal, “the applicant must establish that race, religion, 7 nationality, membership in a particular social group, or 8 political ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals