FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUSTIN STEEVEN SANTOS-PONCE, No. 18-72433 Petitioner, Agency No. v. A206-794-496 ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, OPINION Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 1, 2021 * Pasadena, California Filed February 10, 2021 Before: Ronald M. Gould, John B. Owens, and Lawrence VanDyke, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge VanDyke * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 2 SANTOS-PONCE V. WILKINSON SUMMARY ** Immigration Denying Justin Steeven Santos-Ponce’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of asylum and related relief, the panel held that Ponce’s proposed social group comprised of “minor Christian males who oppose gang membership” is not cognizable, and that he failed to establish the requisite nexus between any harm and his membership in the Santos-Ponce family, or that he would more likely than not be tortured by the Honduran government or with government acquiescence. Addressing Ponce’s first proposed social group comprised of “minor Christian males who oppose gang membership,” the panel concluded that the group is not cognizable because it lacks particularity and social distinction. Noting that this court previously rejected a similar social group in Ramos-Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 855 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that young Honduran men who resisted gang recruitment lacked particularity and social distinction), abrogated in part on other grounds by Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), the panel explained that the record does not show how adding the term “Christian” to minors who oppose gang membership makes the group sufficiently particular or socially distinct. The panel wrote that the record lacked persuasive evidence that there is a viable risk of persecution in Honduras based on one’s Christian religious beliefs or ** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. SANTOS-PONCE V. WILKINSON 3 practices, and the evidence does not compel the conclusion that Honduran society would distinguish between a young Christian male who resists gang recruitment and any other young man who seeks to avoid gang membership. Regarding Ponce’s second proposed social group comprised of members of “the Santos-Ponce family,” the panel concluded that the record did not contain evidence of a nexus between the alleged persecution and his membership in the Santos-Ponce family. The panel explained that while Ponce’s uncle was killed by gang members, the record did not contain any evidence that his uncle’s family membership was one central reason or even a reason that the gang killed him. In addition, the panel concluded that Ponce’s claim of future persecution was undermined by the fact that he has other family members living unharmed in Honduras. The panel also held that substantial evidence supported the Board’s conclusion that Ponce was not eligible for CAT protection. The panel wrote that the agency correctly observed that ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals