Case: 18-60685 Document: 00515323515 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/27/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 27, 2020 No. 18-60685 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JOSE MANUEL PENADO-HERNANDEZ; ASHLEY GABRIELA PENADO- CASTRO; KARLA CASTRO-DE PENADO; DANIELA ELIZABETH PENADO- CASTRO, Petitioners v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 450 779 BIA No. A208 450 780 BIA No. A208 455 141 BIA No. A208 455 142 Before BARKSDALE, HAYNES, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose Manuel Penado-Hernandez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, along with derivative beneficiaries Ashley Gabriela Penado-Castro, Karla Castro-De Penado, and Daniela Elizabeth Penado-Castro, petitions for review * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Case: 18-60685 Document: 00515323515 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/27/2020 No. 18-60685 of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision upholding the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. Penado contends the IJ and BIA erred in concluding: he was not a member of a particular social group (PSG); he did not experience past persecution; and he had no well-founded fear of future persecution. In considering the BIA’s decision (and the IJ’s decision, to the extent it influenced the BIA), our court reviews legal conclusions de novo and factual findings for substantial evidence. Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517–18 (5th Cir. 2012) (citations omitted). On substantial-evidence review, a factual finding will not be disturbed “unless the court decides not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it”. Id. at 518 (emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In that regard, “petitioner has the burden of showing that the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could reach a contrary conclusion”. Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “Asylum is discretionary and may be granted to an alien who is unable or unwilling to return to his home country because of persecution or a well- founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a [PSG], or political opinion.” Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The alien seeking asylum must establish that one of these protected bases “was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant”. Tamara-Gomez v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 343, 348 (5th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). PSG members “share a common immutable characteristic that they either cannot change or should not be required to change because it is fundamental to their individual identities or consciences”. Orellana-Monson, 685 F.3d at 518 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A PSG has 2 Case: 18-60685 Document: 00515323515 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/27/2020 No. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals