Landi Chalco v. Sessions

17-66 Landi Chalco v. Sessions BIA Straus, IJ A205 709 657 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 3rd day of April, two thousand eighteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 DENNIS JACOBS, 8 PETER W. HALL, 9 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 SERGIO RAMIRO LANDI CHALCO, 14 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 17-66 18 NAC 19 20 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, 21 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 22 23 Respondent. 24 _____________________________________ 25 26 FOR PETITIONER: Justin Conlon, Hartford, CT. 27 28 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 29 Attorney General; Paul Fiorino, 1 Senior Litigation Counsel; Rebekah 2 Nahas, Trial Attorney, Office of 3 Immigration Litigation, United 4 States Department of Justice, 5 Washington, DC. 6 7 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 8 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 9 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 10 is DENIED. 11 Petitioner Sergio Ramiro Landi Chalco, a native and 12 citizen of Ecuador, seeks review of a December 9, 2016, 13 decision of the BIA affirming a November 30, 2015, decision 14 of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying asylum, withholding of 15 removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture 16 (“CAT”). In re Sergio Ramiro Landi Chalco, No. A205 709 657 17 (B.I.A. Dec. 9, 2016), aff’g No. A205 709 657 (Immig. Ct. 18 Hartford Nov. 30, 2015). We assume the parties’ familiarity 19 with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 20 We have reviewed the decision of the IJ as modified by 21 the BIA. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 22 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). Since Chalco entered (without 23 inspection) in 2003, he failed to timely file his asylum 24 application with one year of his entry. In any event, he 25 would not qualify. The only issue properly before us is 2 1 whether Landi Chalco satisfied his burden of proof for 2 withholding of removal (asylum) by establishing that the 3 extortion he fears in Ecuador is on account of his membership 4 in a cognizable social group, namely individuals with ties to 5 the United States. We find ...

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