Lema-KaJuana v. Garland

20-3096 Lema-KaJuana v. Garland BIA Wright, IJ A206 369 531 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 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 9th day of January, two thousand twenty- 5 three. 6 7 PRESENT: 8 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR., 9 MYRNA PÉREZ, 10 ALISON J. NATHAN, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 MARIA GLADIS LEMA-KAJUANA, 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 20-3096 18 NAC 19 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED 20 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONER: Michael Borja, Esq., Jackson 25 Heights, NY. 26 27 FOR RESPONDENT: Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant 28 Attorney General; Janice K. 1 Redfern, Senior Litigation 2 Counsel; Gerald M. Alexander, 3 Trial Attorney, Office of 4 Immigration Litigation, United 5 States Department of Justice, 6 Washington, DC. 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 Maria Gladis Lema-Kajuana, a native and 12 citizen of Ecuador, seeks review of an August 14, 2020 13 decision of the BIA affirming an August 14, 2018 decision of 14 an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying her application for 15 asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 16 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Maria Gladis Lema- 17 Kajuana, No. A 206 369 531 (B.I.A. Aug. 14, 2020), aff’g No. 18 A 206 369 531 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Aug. 14, 2018). We assume 19 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 20 procedural history. 21 We have reviewed both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions. 22 See Wangchuck v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524, 528 23 (2d Cir. 2006). The applicable standards of review are well 24 established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Paloka v. Holder, 2 1 762 F.3d 191, 195 (2d Cir. 2014) (reviewing factual findings 2 for substantial evidence and questions of law de novo). In 3 lieu of filing a brief, the Government has moved for summary 4 denial of the petition for review. Rather than determine if 5 the petition is frivolous as is required for summary denial, 6 see Pillay v. INS, 45 F.3d 14, 17 (2d Cir. 1995), we construe 7 …

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