18-2528 Guzman Alejo v. Garland BIA Kolbe, IJ A098 669 637 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 4th day of May, two thousand twenty-one. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, 8 Chief Judge, 9 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 10 WILLIAM J. NARDINI, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 MAURILIO GUZMAN ALEJO, AKA 15 MAURILLIO GUZMAN ALEJO, 16 Petitioner, 17 18 v. 18-2528 19 NAC 20 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 21 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 1 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2), Attorney General Merrick B. Garland is automatically substituted as Respondent. 1 FOR PETITIONER: Samir Deger-Sen, Esq., Latham & 2 Watkins LLP, Washington, DC. 3 4 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant 5 Attorney General; Jessica E. 6 Burns, Senior Litigation Counsel; 7 Rosanne M. Perry, Trial Attorney, 8 Office of Immigration Litigation, 9 Civil Division, United States 10 Department of Justice, Washington, 11 DC. 12 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 13 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 14 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition is DENIED. 15 Petitioner Maurilio Guzman Alejo, a native and citizen 16 of Mexico, seeks review of an August 23, 2018, BIA decision 17 affirming a March 2, 2018, decision of an Immigration Judge 18 (“IJ”) denying Guzman Alejo’s application for withholding of 19 removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture 20 (“CAT”). In re Maurilio Guzman Alejo, No. A 098 669 637 21 (B.I.A. Aug. 23, 2018), aff’g No. A 098 669 637 (Immig. Ct. 22 N.Y. City Mar. 2, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity 23 with the underlying facts and procedural history. 24 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as supplemented by 25 the BIA. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d 26 Cir. 2005). The applicable standards of review are well 27 established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Y.C. v. Holder, 2 1 741 F.3d 324, 332 (2d Cir. 2013) (reviewing legal questions 2 de novo and factual findings for substantial evidence). 3 Whether someone has been persecuted on account of his 4 membership in a particular social group and will likely be 5 tortured in the future …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals