NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 19-2269 _______________ ERIKA NATHALIE MEJIA FUENTES, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent _______________ On Petition for Review of a Decision of the United States Department of Justice Board of Immigration Appeals (A206-315-011) Immigration Judge: Shifra Rubin _______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) on January 30, 2020 Before: CHAGARES, RESTREPO, and BIBAS, Circuit Judges (Filed: February 4, 2020) _______________ OPINION* _______________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and, under I.O.P. 5.7, is not binding precedent. BIBAS, Circuit Judge. Erika Nathalie Mejia Fuentes, a native and citizen of El Salvador, seeks asylum, with- holding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The immigra- tion judge found her credible but denied all relief and ordered her removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals adopted that decision in full, so we review the immigration judge’s decision. Abdulai v. Ashcroft, 239 F.3d 542, 549 n.2 (3d Cir. 2001). The immigration judge had jurisdiction under 8 C.F.R. § 1240.1(a), and the Board had jurisdiction under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(b)(3). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a). To overturn the immigration judge’s dispositive findings of fact, “we must find that the evidence not only supports [a contrary] conclusion, but compels it.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 n.1 (1992) (emphases in original); see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). But the immigration judge’s factual findings were supported by the record, and Mejia does not challenge several of the grounds for denying her claim. So we will deny her petition for review. Mejia seeks asylum and withholding of removal as a member of a particular social group: “Family members of MS-13,” a violent gang in El Salvador. Pet’r Br. 3. The immi- gration judge found that her proposed group did not qualify as a “particular social group” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) because it lacked particularity and social visibility. We need not review that finding, because the immigration judge also found (1) that Mejia did not show past persecution; (2) that any past harm was not because of her familial relation- ship to a gang member; and (3) that while Mejia subjectively feared future harm, her fear was not objectively reasonable and was speculative. Each of these findings is supported by 2 the record, and Mejia cites no record evidence to the contrary. Collectively, these three findings dispose of her petition. First, any past harm did not amount to persecution. True, Mejia was robbed “about three” times by gang members. AR 147. And her cousin Sofia, a gang member, once walked by Mejia menacingly with a knife under her shirt. Mejia later heard that Sofia had wanted to stab her as she walked by, though she did not. The immigration judge reasonably found that these sporadic events did not clear the high bar of persecution. See Ambart- soumian v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 85, 93 (3d Cir. 2004). In any event, Mejia cites no contrary evidence ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals