NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 20-2200 ______________ JUAN SEGUNDO PANDO AUCAY, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of an Administrative Order of Removal of the Department of Homeland Security (A098-495-529) Immigration Judge: Mary Lee ______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) October 22, 2020 ______________ Before: CHAGARES, GREENAWAY, JR., and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges. (Opinion Filed: January 7, 2021) ______________ OPINION* ______________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. GREENAWAY, JR., Circuit Judge. Juan Segundo Pando Aucay petitions for review of a decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) concluding that he was not entitled to relief from reinstatement of a prior order of removal. The IJ concurred in the asylum officer’s conclusion that Pando Aucay had neither a reasonable fear of torture, as required for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), nor a reasonable fear of persecution based on his race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group, as required for withholding of removal. Finding that the IJ provided no explanation for her decision, thus giving us nothing to review, we will grant the petition for review and remand for further proceedings. I. Background Pando Aucay, a native and citizen of Ecuador, was ordered removed from the United States on August 29, 2007. That order was executed on December 3, 2012, when Pando Aucay was removed to Ecuador. Less than a month later, he illegally re-entered the United States on January 2, 2013. After returning to the United States, Pando Aucay lived in New Jersey until December 25, 2018, when he was arrested for a domestic violence offense. On December 28, 2018, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) notified Pando Aucay of its intent to reinstate his prior removal order. In response, Pando Aucay “express[ed] a fear of returning to the country of removal,” as required by 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(a). As a result, he was referred to an asylum officer for a reasonable fear 2 interview. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(b). The purpose of the reasonable fear interview is to give the alien an opportunity to “establish[] a reasonable possibility that he or she would be persecuted on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion, or a reasonable possibility that he or she would be tortured in the country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(c). In his interview with the asylum officer, Pando Aucay was represented by counsel. During the interview, Pando Aucay expressed concern about four claims: (1) fear of reprisal from the coyote1 to whom he still owed money; (2) concern about a robbery that took place shortly after his prior removal; (3) religious discrimination when he was a child attempting to attend school; and (4) crime, in general in Ecuador. The asylum officer concluded that none of these claims supported a reasonable possibility ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals