NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 19-3798 ______________ DANILO ANTONIO PINEDA-GONZALEZ, AKA Danilo P. Gonzalez, AKA. Danilo Pineda, AKA Danilo Gonzalez-Pineda, AKA Donila Pineda-Gonzalez, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ______________ ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS (Agency No. A216-430-404) Immigration Judge: Kyung Auh ______________ Submitted under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) July 1, 2020 ______________ Before: GREENAWAY, JR., SHWARTZ, and RENDELL, Circuit Judges. (Filed: July 21, 2020) ______________ OPINION ______________ This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. SHWARTZ, Circuit Judge. Danilo Antonio Pineda-Gonzalez petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the decision of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). For the reasons set forth below, we will dismiss his petition in part and deny it in part. I Pineda-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, entered the United States in 2011 without inspection. Following a conviction for driving while intoxicated in 2018, Pineda-Gonzalez was issued a Notice to Appear (“NTA”) and placed in removal proceedings.1 At the hearing, he sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. Pineda-Gonzalez claimed that he was persecuted because he belongs to two particular social groups (“PSG”) and for his political opinion. Specifically, he asserted that he is a member of the following PSGs: (a) persons “targeted by the gangs–and in particular, the MS-13 and the 18, for refusing to join and actively opposing joining the gangs” and (b) “the Pineda family—as the only male . . . member.” AR 283. He also argued that his resistance to the gangs was a political opinion. 1 Pineda-Gonzalez argues, citing Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105 (2018), that his NTA was defective because it did not include the date and time of the hearing and, as a result, the IJ lacked jurisdiction. He, however, correctly concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Nkomo v. Att’y Gen., 930 F.3d 129 (3d Cir. 2019). 2 In support of his request, Pineda-Gonzalez submitted documents about the presence of gangs in El Salvador and the government’s efforts to control them.2 He and his sister also testified. Pineda-Gonzalez testified that he lived in an area controlled by MS-13, and gang members threatened him when he refused their recruitment attempts. He also explained that a rival gang controlled the town where his girlfriend lived. He said that the rival gang also attempted to recruit him, but that his problems with that gang arose because a gang member wanted to date his girlfriend. Pineda-Gonzalez believed that MS-13 feared that he was giving the rival gang information about MS-13 and, as a result, the gang threatened him and told him to stop seeing his girlfriend. While both gangs threatened him, neither physically harmed him. Nevertheless, he feared for his ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals