PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 21-1180 ______________ MARTHA ELENA CHAVEZ-CHILEL, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A208-196-682) Immigration Judge: Steven A. Morley ______________ Submitted under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) December 6, 2021 ______________ Before: SHWARTZ, PORTER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. (Filed: December 9, 2021) Theodore J. Murphy Murphy Law Firm 320 North High Street West Chester, PA 19380 Counsel for Petitioner Brian Boynton Acting Assistant Attorney General Sheri R. Glaser United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 878 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Counsel for Respondent ______________ OPINION ______________ SHWARTZ, Circuit Judge. Martha Elena Chavez-Chilel petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the order of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying her applications for asylum and withholding of removal. Because (1) the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) 2 failure to include the date and time of her hearing in its Notice to Appear (“NTA”) does not require termination of her immigration proceedings, and (2) substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that “Guatemalan women” is not a particular social group (“PSG”) for asylum or withholding purposes, we will deny the petition. I Chavez-Chilel, a native and citizen of Guatemala, entered the United States without admission or parole. DHS issued her an NTA before an IJ, “on a date to be set at a time to be set,” charging her with removability pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). A.R. 444–45. She was subsequently served a Notice of Hearing that specified the date and time to appear. Before the IJ, Chavez-Chilel admitted the factual allegations in the NTA and conceded removability as charged. She then filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). With respect to her claims for asylum and withholding of removal, she asserted that she would be subject to persecution because she is a member of a PSG: “Guatemalan women.” A.R. 202. Chavez-Chilel moved to terminate her removal proceedings, arguing that the NTA was defective under Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105, 2114–15 (2018). The IJ denied the motion, reasoning that (1) Pereira concerned only 3 cancellation of removal and its stop-time rule,1 not asylum or withholding of removal, (2) Chavez-Chilel suffered no prejudice from any deficiency in the NTA, and (3) a deficient NTA does not divest the IJ of jurisdiction. At her merits hearing, Chavez-Chilel testified that she was raped as a teenager in Guatemala, the police did not take any action when she reported this crime, and the same man later threatened to rape her again. She explained that she feared she would be sexually assaulted or killed if she was removed to Guatemala. The IJ denied Chavez-Chilel’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal,2 finding that, while she was credible and that her rape qualified as past persecution, her proposed …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals