18-273 M.M.M. v. Barr BIA Wright, IJ A206 808 173/174 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. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 27th day of October, two thousand twenty. PRESENT: JOSEPH F. BIANCO, WILLIAM J. NARDINI, Circuit Judges.* _____________________________________ M.M.M., E.M.S., Petitioners, v. 18-273 NAC WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. 1 _____________________________________ * Circuit Judge Peter W. Hall, originally a member of the panel, is currently unavailable, and the petition is being adjudicated by the two available members of the panel, who are in agreement. See 2d Cir. IOP E(b). 1 The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption as indicated above. 1 FOR PETITIONERS: Richard Mancino, Shaimaa M. Hussein, Elizabeth L. Dunn, Matthew R. Dollan, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, NY; Jennifer H. Kim, Caitlin Miner-Le Grand, City Bar Justice Center, New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Jeffrey Bossert Clark, Acting Assistant Attorney General; Stephen J. Flynn, Assistant Director; Robert Michael Stalzer, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) is DENIED. Petitioners 2 M.M.M. and E.M.S., natives and citizens of El Salvador, seek review of a January 23, 2018, decision of the BIA affirming an October 5, 2015, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying M.M.M.’s application for asylum and withholding of removal.3 In re M.M.M. and E.M.S., Nos. A206 808 173/174 (B.I.A. Jan. 23, 2018), aff’g No. A206 808 173/174 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Oct. 5, 2015). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 2 We grant the unopposed motion to abbreviate petitioners’ names pursuant to Second Circuit Local Rule 27.1(j). 3 We do not review M.M.M.’s claim for relief under the Convention Against Torture, a legally distinct claim which she waived by failing to argue it in her opening brief. See Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 541 n.1 (2d Cir. 2005). 2 procedural history. Under the circumstances of this case, we review the IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA, that is, minus the grounds that the BIA did not reach. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals