Juliana Rodriguez-Mejia De Ca v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 21-1835 _____________ JULIANA RODRIGUEZ-MEJIA DE CALO, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of a Final Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals No. A206-308-225 Immigration Judge: John P. Ellington ______________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) on December 16, 2022 Before: RESTREPO, McKEE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 11, 2023) _____________________ OPINION ______________________ McKEE, Circuit Judge:  This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Juliana Rodriguez-Mejia De Calo (“Rodriguez-Mejia”) seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of her application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture. An Immigration Judge denied Rodriguez-Mejia’s petition because it found Rodriguez-Mejia did not testify credibly and did not meet her burden of proof for withholding of removal and protection under the CAT. The BIA presumed that Rodriguez-Mejia was credible but affirmed the IJ’s holding that Rodriguez-Mejia did not meet her burden of proof for withholding of removal and protection under the CAT. We will assume that Rodriguez-Mejia’s testimony was credible because the BIA expressly declined to reach the IJ’s adverse credibility determination.1 Despite Rodriguez-Mejia’s credible fear of returning to Guatemala, we have no choice but to affirm the BIA’s decision and deny the petition for review because of our deferential standard of review.2 I. Rodriguez-Mejia is a citizen of Guatemala. For several years, gang members repeatedly threatened Rodriguez-Mejia and her son, Oliver, because he refused to join their gang. They told Oliver “[t]hat if he did not work with them, they would kill his whole family.”3 Gang members also beat Oliver, fracturing his head and arm, and pushed Rodriguez-Mejia to the ground. Because she was afraid to file a complaint, Rodriguez- Mejia did not make any reports to the police. 1 Sandie v. Att’y Gen., 562 F.3d 246, 250 (3d Cir. 2009). 2 We have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s order under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). 3 AR 143. 2 Rodriguez-Mejia and Oliver attempted to escape the gangs by relocating to Santa Lucia, a Guatemalan town six or seven hours from their home. Gang members found them in Santa Lucia and tried to abduct Oliver while they were in a store. The police were also in the store at the time and Rodriguez-Mejia asked the officers for help. The police intervened and took Oliver to Rodriguez-Mejia’s sister-in-law’s house, but they “didn’t do anything” to the gang members.4 In 2016, after the attempted abduction, Rodriguez-Mejia and Oliver moved to the United States to escape the threats from gang members. Approximately ten months after moving to the United States, gang members killed Rodriguez-Mejia’s cousin in Guatemala because he would not disclose Rodriguez-Mejia’s and Oliver’s whereabouts. II. If the BIA “‘affirmed and partially reiterated’ the IJ’s determinations, we review both decisions.”5 “If the BIA relied on only some of the grounds given for denying relief, we …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals