NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 19a0208n.06 Case No. 18-3624 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Apr 30, 2019 JACQUELINE LIZET NOLASCO- ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk GONZALEZ, aka Jacqueline Gonzalez ) Nolasco; BRYAN ERNESTO GONZALEZ- ) NOLASCO, ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES Petitioners, ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS v. ) ) WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, ) ) Respondent. ) BEFORE: ROGERS, DONALD, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges. THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Jacqueline Nolasco-Gonzalez and her son, Bryan, petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We deny their petition. I. When Jacqueline Nolasco-Gonzalez and her son, Bryan, fled El Salvador and illegally entered the United States, she told a border patrol agent that they were coming to “work and live.”1 A.R. 169. The border patrol agent asked her if she had any fears about returning to El Salvador. 1 All names are spelled as they appear in Petitioners’ brief. Jacqueline Nolasco-Gonzalez is the lead petitioner in this case; her son Bryan is a derivative petitioner. Case No. 18-3624, Nolasco-Gonzalez v. Barr Nolasco-Gonzalez said no. When asked if she would be harmed if she returned to El Salvador, Nolasco-Gonzalez again said no. But later that year Nolasco-Gonzalez applied for asylum and presented a different story about repeated rapes and threats by MS-13. She said that a member of MS-13, Edwin Ismail Dimas Hernandez (“Dimas”), threatened to harm her family if she did not become his “girlfriend.” A.R. 363, 501. As Dimas’s “girlfriend,” Nolasco-Gonzalez explained that when Dimas went to prison for killing a police officer, MS-13 forced her to visit him once a month. Each time Dimas raped her. MS-13 told her she had to continue her visits or else they would kill her mother and son. After five years, she decided to stop her visits. But this did not go over well, and MS-13 told her she had to visit Dimas or they would kill her. She chose to flee to the United States with her son instead. After a hearing, the Immigration Judge found that Nolasco-Gonzalez was not credible and subsequently denied her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) affirmed. Nolasco-Gonzalez now petitions for review in this court, claiming the Board erred when it affirmed the Immigration Judge’s denial of her application, which included an adverse credibility determination. II. We review credibility determinations for substantial evidence and must accept them “unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary[.]” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); see Zhao v. Holder, 569 F.3d 238, 247 (6th Cir. 2009). Two key inconsistencies in Nolasco-Gonzalez’s asylum claim support the Immigration Judge’s adverse credibility determination. First, Nolasco-Gonzalez told agents at the border that she did not have any fears about returning to El Salvador and that she did not expect to be harmed if ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals