Case: 20-60917 Document: 00516062086 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/20/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 20, 2021 No. 20-60917 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Carlos Ramon Mejia Del Cid, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals No. A 095 097 148 Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Carlos Mejia Del Cid, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dis- missing his appeal of the denial by an immigration judge of his application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Tor- * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opin- ion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60917 Document: 00516062086 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/20/2021 No. 20-60917 ture (“CAT”). In his application, Mejia Del Cid had claimed he was afraid to return to Honduras because he feared that he would be extorted, tortured, and killed by gang members who wished to recruit or extort him or by a for- mer client who had argued with him over a payment. His counsel designated his proposed particular social group as “people who fear for their welfare and well-being.” In his petition, Mejia Del Cid avers generally that he proved that he had a well-founded fear of future persecution and that he was unwil- ling or unable to return to Honduras. On petition for review of a BIA decision, we review factual findings for substantial evidence and questions of law de novo. Lopez-Gomez v. Ash- croft, 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). The substantial-evidence standard applies to review of decisions denying withholding of removal and relief under the CAT and requires only that the BIA’s conclusion be based on the evidence presented and that its decision be substantially reasonable. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005); Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996). “This court may not overturn the BIA’s factual findings unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.” Gomez- Palacios v. Holder, 560 F.3d 354, 358 (5th Cir. 2009). Mejia Del Cid has failed to brief any challenge to the BIA’s disposition of his claims arising under the CAT, so he has abandoned them. See Nastase v. Barr, 964 F.3d 313, 318 n.2 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 877 (2020). To the extent that his withholding-of-removal claim is not abandoned, Mejia Del Cid has not demonstrated that the record compels a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s. To obtain withholding of removal, a petitioner must show a “clear probability” or that “it is more likely than not” that, if he returns to his native country, he will be persecuted “on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in particular social group, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals