Eunice Soto-Ambrocio v. Jefferson Sessions, III

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 18a0151n.06 No. 17-4031 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Mar 22, 2018 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk EUNICE SOTO-AMBROCIO; ERIKA DE ) LEON-SOTO, ) ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW Petitioners, ) FROM THE UNITED STATES v. ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. ) APPEALS Attorney General, ) ) Respondent. ) BEFORE: COLE, Chief Judge; GUY and DONALD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Eunice Soto Ambrocio, along with her daughter, Erika De Leon Soto, as a derivative applicant, petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We deny the petition. Soto Ambrocio and her then one-year-old daughter, both natives and citizens of Guatemala, entered the United States without inspection in November 2014. Upon entry, the Department of Homeland Security served them with notices to appear in removal proceedings, charging them with removability as aliens present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). After appearing before an immigration judge (IJ), Soto Ambrocio conceded removability as charged and submitted an application for asylum and withholding of removal based on her membership in a particular social group. At the hearing on her application, Soto Ambrocio defined her particular social group as young women from Guatemala subject to abuse from families. Soto Ambrocio testified that she No. 17-4031, Soto-Ambrocio v. Sessions and her younger sister Cindy lived with their grandparents and uncle in Guatemala after their parents left for the United States. According to Soto Ambrocio, her uncle verbally harassed her, saying that he wanted to have sexual relations with her, but never physically harmed her. Soto Ambrocio testified that she left Guatemala because she was afraid that her uncle would do something to her and her daughter. Soto Ambrocio’s sister Cindy also testified, confirming that their uncle harassed and controlled Soto Ambrocio. Cindy testified that their uncle began touching her when she was twelve years old and then forced her to have sexual relations with him. Cindy asserted that she left Guatemala because of their uncle’s abuse. The sisters both testified that they never reported their uncle to the police because they thought that the police would not do anything. After the hearing, the IJ denied Soto Ambrocio’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal and ordered her and her daughter’s removal to Guatemala. The IJ found that Soto Ambrocio and her sister were credible but determined that Soto Ambrocio’s generalized testimony and lack of corroboration failed to satisfy her burden. The IJ went on to find that the uncle’s behavior toward Soto Ambrocio, although reprehensible, did not rise to the level of past persecution and that she failed to establish that the police would be unable or unwilling to protect her. According to the IJ, Soto Ambrocio’s proposed social group failed because it was defined by the harm suffered and lacked particularity ...

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