FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT November 15, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court OMAR HERNANDEZ-ORTIZ, Petitioner, v. No. 19-9519 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before LUCERO, O’BRIEN, and CARSON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Omar Hernandez-Ortiz, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the denial of withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), we deny review. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. BACKGROUND When Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz was only eight years old, older neighborhood boys started pressuring him to join the MS-13 gang. The boys constantly threatened him, displaying weapons and promising physical harm. On one occasion they assaulted him, leaving his face and nose bleeding. The pressure and threats continued for some three years until Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz left Guatemala and came to the United States in 2004, when he was eleven. In 2016, the government issued Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz a notice to appear. Conceding that he was removable and that an asylum application would be untimely, he applied for withholding of removal and CAT relief based on his past treatment by the gang members and his fears of violent retribution by MS-13 if he returned to Guatemala. For withholding of removal, a petitioner must demonstrate his life or freedom would be threatened because of one or more protected grounds. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz chose the protected category of “membership in a particular social group,” id., and proposed a “particular social group” of “young men in Guatemala who are opposed to gang membership and that opposition is known to gang members,” Admin. R. at 112 (hearing); see also id. at 18 (BIA brief). The IJ found Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz to be credible and that, in light of his young age at the time, the treatment he experienced could rise to the level of persecution. But he determined that Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz had failed to demonstrate a nexus between the conduct and a cognizable “particular social group.” The IJ concluded 2 that the proposed group was not a cognizable “particular social group” because it did not satisfy the requirements of particularity and social distinction. The IJ further held that even if the group were cognizable, Mr. Hernandez-Ortiz had failed to demonstrate that his membership in that group was a central ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals