Arevalo-Lara v. Sessions, III

FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT May 4, 2018 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court ROSA AMELIA AREVALO-LARA, Petitioner, v. No. 17-9534 (Petition for Review) JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before BRISCOE, MATHESON, and EID, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioner Rosa Amelia Arevalo-Lara is a native and citizen of Guatemala who entered the United States illegally. She applied for asylum, restriction on removal,1 and * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 1 Restriction on removal was referred to as “withholding of removal” before amendments made to the Immigration and Nationality Act made by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Although the parties, the immigration judge, and the Board of Immigration Appeals refer to withholding of removal, because this claim was filed after 1996, we use the term “restriction on removal” throughout this Order and Judgment. relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The immigration judge (IJ) found that Arevalo-Lara was not entitled to relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed Arevalo-Lara’s appeal. We agree with the BIA’s decision and deny the petition for review. I. BACKGROUND The IJ’s Decision Arevalo-Lara was placed in removal proceeding when she attempted to enter the United States without authorization in 2010. She conceded removability, but argued for asylum, restriction on removal, and relief under CAT. At her hearing in 2012, Arevalo-Lara maintained that she suffered past persecution and feared future persecution on account of her membership in a particular social group, which she defined as “Guatemalan women who are unable to leave their relationships or who are viewed as property by their domestic partners.” R. at 138. Based on Arevalo-Lara’s testimony at the hearing, the IJ made the following findings of fact:  She was 24 years-old and living in Guatemala City when she began living with a man 16 years older than her. They had one son together, but never married.  Shortly after she began living with the man, she noticed that he was engaged in illegal activity associated with his membership in a gang. She joined him in illegal activity when the man threatened to harm their son.  During this time, the man also forced her to engage in sexual relations with a variety of men. She bore a second son (father unknown) as a result of one of these encounters.  She left the man and lived elsewhere ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals