Case: 20-60240 Document: 00515992042 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/24/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED August 24, 2021 No. 20-60240 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Yessica Naida Cornejo-Fernandez; Gabriela Elizabeth Cornejo-Fernandez, Petitioners, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 377 456; A208 377 457 Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Yessica Naida Cornejo-Fernandez and her minor child Gabriela Elizabeth Cornejo-Fernandez are natives and citizens of El Salvador. They petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60240 Document: 00515992042 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/24/2021 No. 20-60240 dismissing their appeal from an Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order denying asylum and withholding of removal. The petition is denied. The court reviews findings of fact, including the denial of asylum and withholding of removal under the substantial evidence standard. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Legal questions are reviewed de novo. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007). First, Cornejo-Fernandez argues that the BIA erred by affirming the IJ’s finding that she failed to present a cognizable particular social group. A particular social group must be made up of members who share a common immutable characteristic, be defined with particularity, and be distinct from other persons within society. See Pena Oseguera v. Barr, 936 F.3d 249, 251 (5th Cir. 2019). As the IJ noted, the particular social group “[Salvadoran] women who fear violence and delinquency in their home country” lacks any particularity and could be half of the population of El Salvador. See ROA.46. This portion of the petition for review is denied. Id. Next, Cornejo-Fernandez argues that the BIA failed to provide meaningful review of her appeal by not considering whether the particular social group “Salvadoran women threatened by gang members because of their status as crime witnesses” was cognizable. That particular social group was not identified before the IJ. The BIA was not required to address this particular social group for the first time on appeal. See Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 786 (5th Cir. 2016). Accordingly, the BIA did not abuse its discretion by refusing to consider this particular social group. See id. There is nothing in the record demonstrating that the BIA failed to provide meaningful review. Additionally, Cornejo-Fernandez failed to prove that a lack of meaningful review resulted in her being “denied the opportunity to be heard or present evidence.” Toscano-Gil v. Trominski, 210 2 Case: 20-60240 Document: 00515992042 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/24/2021 No. 20-60240 F.3d 470, 474 (5th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, these portions of the petition for review are denied. Cornejo-Fernandez also contends that because the IJ addressed the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals