17-429 Coello-Mutate v. Barr BIA Straus, IJ A206 480 524/525 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 1st day of May, two thousand nineteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 GERARD E. LYNCH, 8 CHRISTOPHER F. DRONEY, 9 RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 BETI MARLEN COELLO-MUTATE, 14 CRISTIAN NORBEY MENDEZ-COELLO, 15 Petitioners, 16 17 v. 17-429 18 NAC 19 WILLIAM P. BARR, 20 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONER: Milagros S. Cruz, Hartford, CT. 25 26 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 27 Attorney General; Stephen J. 28 Flynn, Assistant Director; Kathryn 29 M. McKinney, Trial Attorney, 30 Office of Immigration Litigation, 31 United States Department of 32 Justice, Washington, DC. 33 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 2 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 3 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 4 is DENIED. 5 Petitioners Beti Marlen Coello-Mutate and Cristian 6 Norbey Mendez-Coello, natives and citizens of Honduras, seek 7 review of a January 26, 2017 decision of the BIA affirming a 8 March 15, 2016 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying 9 their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and 10 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re 11 Beti Marlen Coello-Mutate and Cristian Norbey Mendez-Coello, 12 No. A 206 480 524/525 (B.I.A. Jan. 26, 2017), aff’g No. A 206 13 480 524/525 (Immig. Ct. Hartford Mar. 15, 2016). We assume 14 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 15 procedural history in this case. 16 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed 17 the IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA, i.e., minus the 18 social group and nexus determinations that the BIA did not 19 reach. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 20 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). We review the agency’s findings of 21 fact under the substantial evidence standard, treating such 22 findings as “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator 2 1 would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” Hong Fei 2 Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 (2d Cir. 2018) (quoting 8 3 U.S.C. §1252(b)(4)(B)). 4 To establish asylum ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals