Case: 18-60193 Document: 00514953742 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 13, 2019 No. 18-60193 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk FATIMA PRISSILA MORALES-DURAN; EVA LISDEY MORALES-DURAN, Petitioners v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 453 302 BIA No. A208 453 306 Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Fatima Prissila Morales-Duran and her derivative-beneficiary, Eva Lisdey Morales-Duran, natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding the decision of the immigration judge (IJ) denying their application for asylum and withholding of removal. Morales contends her claims she was threatened with * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Case: 18-60193 Document: 00514953742 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2019 No. 18-60193 death by gang members in El Salvador if she did not pay them “rent” constitutes past persecution. In addition, she asserts she was persecuted on account of her status as a single working mother without a male figure in her household. Morales maintains she is unable to change the gang’s perception of her as a single working mother or her prior compliance with their extortion demands. She also claims she has shown a well-founded fear of future persecution based on past persecution and her knowledge that gang members in El Salvador retaliate against individuals who do not comply with their demands. “We review factual findings of the BIA and IJ for substantial evidence, and questions of law de novo”. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted); see also Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). An alien may be granted asylum if she “is unable or unwilling to return to [her] home country” because she has been persecuted “or [has] a well- founded fear of persecution on account of” a protected status, including “membership in a particular social group”. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). A particular social group shares “a common immutable characteristic that [members] either cannot change or should not be required to change because it is fundamental to their individual identities or consciences”. Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In addition, a particular social group is one that has “social visibility”, meaning “members of a society perceive those with the characteristic in question as members of a social group”, and “particularity”, meaning the group “can accurately be described in a manner sufficiently distinct that the group would be recognized, in the society in 2 Case: 18-60193 Document: 00514953742 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/13/2019 No. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals