Case: 22-60126 Document: 00516637989 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/07/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 22-60126 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ February 7, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Luz Marina Garcia-Romero, Clerk Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. ______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A206 710 266 ______________________________ Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Luz Marina Garcia-Romero, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), dismissing her appeal and affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ’s) denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 22-60126 Document: 00516637989 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/07/2023 No. 22-60126 On review of an order of the BIA, this court examines “the BIA’s decision and only consider[s] the IJ’s decision to the extent that it influenced the BIA.” Shaikh v. Holder, 588 F.3d 861, 863 (5th Cir. 2009). Because the BIA agreed with the IJ’s analysis and conclusions, we review both decisions. See id. This court reviews the BIA’s factual findings for substantial evidence, and it will not reverse such findings unless the petitioner shows that “the evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could conclude against it.” Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536-37 (quote at 537) (5th Cir. 2009). Among the findings that this court reviews for substantial evidence is the factual conclusion that an alien is not eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT protection. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Garcia-Romero contends that the factors of Matter of N-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 526, 532-34 (BIA 2011), support the finding that she established the requisite nexus between the persecution she experienced or fears in Honduras and her political opinion, but this is simply an argument that the BIA should have weighed the evidence differently, which is insufficient to reverse the BIA’s decision. As this court has explained, “the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence does not preclude an administrative agency’s finding from being supported by substantial evidence.” Revencu v. Sessions, 895 F.3d 396, 401 (5th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks, brackets, and citation omitted). Here, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s findings that Garcia- Romero failed to show that her abusive father was motivated by or even aware of her feminist political opinion or that he attributed such an opinion to her. See Wang, 569 F.3d at 536. The BIA reasonably found that Garcia-Romero’s father abused her and her siblings “for personal reasons peculiar to himself 2 Case: 22-60126 Document: 00516637989 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/07/2023 No. 22-60126 and the family,” namely that he was a violent person who was obsessed with Garcia-Romero’s mother and wanted to make her suffer. See id. at 537. This court has upheld …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals