Case: 19-60015 Document: 00515204984 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/19/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 19, 2019 No. 19-60015 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk MARISOL CAROLINA DEL CID-LAZO; ELENA MARISOL GUEVARA-DEL CID, Petitioners v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 975 906 BIA No. A208 975 907 Before BARKSDALE, HAYNES, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Marisol Carolina Del Cid-Lazo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision upholding an immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. She contends the BIA erred in affirming and adopting the IJ’s denial because: the record established persecution on account of her * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Case: 19-60015 Document: 00515204984 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/19/2019 No. 19-60015 membership in a particular social group (PSG); and the BIA did not address the IJ’s failure to consider evidence of her status as a crime witness. On or about 6 April 2016, Del Cid, together with her daughter, Elena Marisol Guevara-Del Cid, unlawfully entered the United States. Because they lacked valid entry documentation, the Department of Homeland Security issued Del Cid a Notice to Appear, charging removability, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). After conceding removability at a hearing before an IJ, Del Cid, acting on behalf of herself and her daughter, filed an application for, inter alia, asylum and withholding of removal, seeking relief based on her membership in a PSG: “Salvadoran women who fear Violence & Delinquency in their home country”. In support of her application, Del Cid alleged that, after witnessing gang-related activity, she received threatening telephone calls, seeking to coerce her assistance in identifying targets for extortion. The IJ denied Del Cid’s application, and the BIA affirmed the denial, adopting the IJ’s decision. Ordinarily, “this court has the authority to review only the BIA’s decision”; we may, however, “review the IJ’s findings and conclusions if[, as in this instance,] the BIA adopts them”. Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009) (citations omitted). “We review factual findings of the BIA and IJ for substantial evidence, and questions of law de novo . . . .” Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted). “Asylum is discretionary and may be granted to an alien who is unable or unwilling to return to [her] home country because of persecution or a well- founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a [PSG], or political opinion.” Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “To be eligible for withholding of ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals