NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 19a0534n.06 No. 19-3014 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT EVA JUANA NOLASCO-MORALES; ALVYN ) FILED WILDER NOLASCO-MORALES; KEVYN ) Oct 18, 2019 ROLFY MENDEZ-NOLASCO, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) Petitioners, ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES v. ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, ) ) Respondent. ) BEFORE: BOGGS, SUHRHEINRICH, and WHITE, Circuit Judges. SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Eva Nolasco-Morales and her minor children,1 natives and citizens of Guatemala, sought asylum and withholding of removal based upon harm she experienced on account of her membership in a “particular social group,” which she identified as “unmarried Guatemalan women with children not living with the father of the children,” or “Guatemalan women unable to leave a relationship.” The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that the proposed social groups were not cognizable under 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(42)(A) and dismissed the appeal. She seeks review. Facts. Nolasco-Morales and her children entered the United States illegally on April 20, 2015 and were placed in removal proceedings by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Nolasco-Morales admitted the factual allegations in her Notice to Appear and conceded 1 Nolasco-Morales’s children are derivative beneficiaries of her asylum application. No. 19-3014, Nolasco-Morales, et al. v. Barr removability. Nolasco-Morales applied for asylum, withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). As revealed by her testimony before an immigration judge (IJ), Nolasco-Morales is indigenous. She was raised by her mother after her father abandoned her family. She has two children with a man named Rolfy. She lived with Rolfy and his family. Rolfy’s father was abusive towards her. He hit her once in the face and once threatened to kill her. Rolfy’s father was also abusive to Rolfy, which eventually caused Rolfy to abandon Nolasco-Morales and their children. Nolasco-Morales testified that she did not know why her father-in-law disliked her. Rolfy’s cousin also threatened her because he thought Nolasco-Morales used witchcraft to make the cousin’s brother sick. Nolasco-Morales returned to her mother’s house about two years after Rolfy disappeared. Two years after that she left for the United States. During the time she stayed with her mother, she had no contact with Rolfy’s family, although she was told by neighbors that Rolfy’s father and cousin still had plans to kill her. Procedural History. At the time Nolasco-Morales filed her application, the BIA recognized that “married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship” constituted a “particular social group.” See Matter of A-R-C-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 388, 390 (B.I.A. 2014). As noted, Nolasco-Morales sought asylum and withholding of removal based upon similar group definitions— “unmarried Guatemalan women with children not living with the father of the children,” and “Guatemalan women unable to leave a relationship.” Although the IJ credited Nolasco-Morales’s testimony, she denied the applications and ordered the Petitioners removed to Guatemala. The IJ found that the group “unmarried ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals