NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 20-3227 ____________ JOSE DIAZ-SILUESTRE, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A208-203-410) Immigration Judge: Kuyomars Q. Golparvar Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) On June 24, 2021 Before: *CHAGARES, Chief Judge, PORTER and ROTH, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: February 3, 2022) O P I N I ON* * * Judge Chagares assumed Chief Judge status on December 4, 2021. ** This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. ROTH, Circuit Judge: Jose Diaz Silvestre 1 seeks review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), affirming the denial of his application for withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We will deny the petition for review. I. 2 Diaz Silvestre was born in Guatemala and is a Guatemalan citizen. He first entered the United States without inspection in October 2015. He was removed a few weeks later. In 2018, he again entered the United States without inspection. The Department of Homeland Security reinstated the removal order. An immigration judge allowed Diaz Silvestre to apply for withholding of removal and CAT protection, which commenced these proceedings. Before the IJ, Diaz Silvestre offered three bases for his application: (1) discrimination because of membership in the Popti indigenous group, (2) fear that his land will be taken or that he will be harmed because of his land, and (3) denial of benefits because of his support for a political candidate. 3 The IJ held that Diaz Silvestre failed to satisfy the criteria for withholding of removal based on the proffered social group of landowners. He held that “landowner,” as 1 Although the administrative proceeding was captioned with the spelling “Diaz- Siluestre,” the Court will use the spelling that he used in his written statements, “Diaz Silvestre.” 2 Because we write primarily for the parties, we discuss only the facts and proceedings to the extent necessary for resolution of this case. 3 The IJ credited Diaz Silvestre’s testimony. 2 defined in this case, is not a particular social group under the INA. Even if it were, Diaz Silvestre’s difficulties securing title to his land and fear of it being taken by his nephew were not persecution and did not establish a risk of future persecution. The IJ also found that, despite having some difficulties with Spanish, Diaz Silvestre could seek assistance from Guatemalan authorities if his land is threatened. Next, the IJ rejected the claim based on membership in the Popti indigenous group. He agreed that Diaz Silvestre is Popti and Popti individuals face discrimination in Guatemala. However, he found that Diaz Silvestre did not offer evidence that he has been or will be persecuted because he is Popti. Instead, he testified that he owed his brother-in-law money and his …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals