19-864 Kquerare Salcedo v. Garland BIA Ruehle, IJ A206 437 713 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. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 4th day of May, two thousand twenty-one. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 JOHN M. WALKER, JR., 8 BARRINGTON D. PARKER, 9 JOSEPH F. BIANCO, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 JAVIER SANTOS KQUERARE SALCEDO, 14 Petitioner, 15 16 v. 19-864 17 NAC 18 MERRICK B GARLAND, UNITED STATES 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL,* 20 Respondent. 21 _____________________________________ 22 23 FOR PETITIONER: Jose Perez, Esq., Syracuse, NY. 24 25 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney 26 General; Russell J. E. Verby, 27 Senior Litigation Counsel; Kristin * The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as set forth. 1 Moresi, Trial Attorney, Office of 2 Immigration Litigation, United 3 States Department of Justice, 4 Washington, DC. 5 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 6 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 7 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 8 is DENIED. 9 Petitioner Javier Santos Kquerare Salcedo, a native and 10 citizen of Peru, seeks review of a March 5, 2019, decision of 11 the BIA affirming a December 6, 2017, decision of an 12 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Salcedo’s application for 13 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 14 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Javier Santos 15 Kquerare Salcedo, No. A 206 437 713 (B.I.A. Mar. 5, 2019), 16 aff’g No. A 206 437 713 (Immig. Ct. Buffalo Dec. 6, 2017). We 17 assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 18 procedural history. 19 We have reviewed the decisions of both the IJ and the 20 BIA. See Yun-Zui Guan v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 391, 394 (2d 21 Cir. 2005). Salcedo does not challenge the agency’s denial 22 of asylum as time barred, so we address only the adverse 23 credibility that formed the basis for the denial of 2 1 withholding of removal and CAT relief. The applicable 2 standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 3 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 4 (2d Cir. 2018) (reviewing adverse credibility determination 5 under substantial evidence standard). “Considering …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals