United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1773 ___________________________ Enmanuel Isaac Rodriguez Fuentes lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner Fatima Rodriguez Fuentes lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: May 13, 2020 Filed: August 12, 2020 [Published] ____________ Before SMITH, Chief Judge, MELLOY and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Fatima Rodriguez Fuentes and her minor son Emmanuel Isaac Rodriguez Fuentes (“Emmanuel”), natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review from a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ) order of removal. We deny the petition. I. Background Fuentes and Emmanuel are natives and citizens of El Salvador who applied for admission to the United States at the Douglass, Arizona port of entry on March 30, 2016. On September 9, 2016, Fuentes and her son were placed in removal proceedings by issuance of separate Notices to Appear. They were charged with being removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) as aliens who at the time of application for admission did not possess valid entry documents. At a hearing, they admitted to the allegations against them and conceded the charge of removability. Fuentes subsequently filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Emmanuel’s application was derivative of Fuentes’s asylum application.1 Fuentes claimed that she was persecuted because of her membership in the Fuentes family—specifically, because of her relationship with Reynaldo Fuentes Espinosa, her uncle. She also 1 “[T]here are no derivative benefits associated with a grant of withholding of removal because, unlike the asylum statute, the withholding statute contains no mention of derivative rights.” Martinez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 324 F. App’x 829, 833 (11th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). Likewise, protection under CAT does not provide derivative benefits. Id. (“The CAT regulation likewise contains no mention of derivative rights; it limits the applicant and seemingly forecloses a derivative claim.”). Emmanuel did not file an independent application for withholding of removal or CAT protection; therefore, his only avenue for relief from removal is as a derivative beneficiary of Fuentes’s asylum application. -2- claimed that she was persecuted because of her status as a female head of household and as a vulnerable Salvadoran female. The IJ conducted a hearing on Fuentes’s application. Fuentes testified that she left El Salvador because members of the MS-13 gang threatened her, asked her to give them money in exchange for not harming her, and asked for information about Espinosa. According to Fuentes, MS-13 controlled the town in which she and her family lived. Espinosa lived in the same town and was friendly with members of “18,” a rival gang. MS-13 suspected Espinosa of passing information to the rival gang and shot at him in retaliation. Espinosa fled to another part of El Salvador after the shooting. Fuentes testified that after Espinosa fled, MS-13 members began asking her for information regarding his whereabouts. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals