Case: 22-60403 Document: 00516698111 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/03/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit FILED No. 22-60403 April 3, 2023 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk Yessica Carolina Garcia-Manzanares; Jorge Manuel Pinel-Garcia; Kendra Carolina Aguilar-Garcia; Kenneth Fabricio Pinel-Garcia, Petitioners, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. ______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency Nos. A209 241 496, A209 241 497, A209 241 498, A209 241 499 ______________________________ Before Barksdale, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Yessica Carolina Garcia-Manzanares, native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) dismissing _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-60403 Document: 00516698111 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/03/2023 No. 22-60403 her appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Although Garcia filed separate applications for herself and each of her children, she described the children as riders on her application, and the BIA treated them as such. Accordingly, her petition is on behalf of herself and her children.) The BIA “affirm[ed] the [IJ’s] decision for the reasons set forth by the [IJ]”, as well as providing additional reasons for denying relief. In considering the BIA’s decision (and the IJ’s, to the extent, as in this instance, it influenced the BIA), legal conclusions are reviewed de novo; factual findings, for substantial evidence. E.g., Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517–18 (5th Cir. 2012). Under the substantial-evidence standard, petitioner must demonstrate “the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could reach a contrary conclusion”. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s reasonable determination that Garcia was targeted for extortion for economic gain based on her perceived wealth, not based on her proposed particular social groups (PSG). E.g., Gonzalez-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 219, 224 (5th Cir. 2019) (explaining membership in PSG must be “at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant” (citation omitted)). And the BIA did not err in continuing to conclude that people who resist gang recruitment do not constitute a PSG. E.g., Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir. 2016) (approving unpublished decision holding alien’s refusal to pay bribes did not make her member of PSG because one’s anti-gang values or antagonistic relationship with gangs does not amount to a common immutable characteristic). 2 Case: 22-60403 Document: 00516698111 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/03/2023 No. 22-60403 Further, as Garcia acknowledges, her contention that the nexus standard is lower for a withholding claim is foreclosed in this circuit. E.g., Vazquez-Guerra v. Garland, 7 F.4th 265, 271 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1228 (2022) (“Despite [petitioner]’s argument that withholding of removal involves a ‘less demanding’ and ‘more relaxed’ standard than asylum for meeting the nexus requirement, this court has held …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals