Case: 18-60180 Document: 00514850853 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/26/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-60180 FILED Summary Calendar February 26, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk MICHAEL STEEVEN BAQUEDANO-ORDONEZ, Petitioner v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 190 973 Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Michael Steeven Baquedano-Ordonez, a native and citizen of Honduras, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA’s) order dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision, challenging only the BIA’s conclusions on his asylum and withholding-of-removal claims. He contends, inter alia, the BIA erred by concluding he was not a member of a particular * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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: 18-60180 Document: 00514850853 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/26/2019 No. 18-60180 social group comprised of young Honduran men with family in the United States. A factual determination an alien is ineligible for asylum or withholding of removal is reviewed for substantial evidence. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Under that standard, an immigration court’s factual finding is not erroneous unless “the evidence was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could conclude against it”. Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 537 (5th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Petitioner has the burden of demonstrating the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that reached by the BIA. Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 295, 306 (5th Cir. 2005). Baquedano has not met this standard because, inter alia, the evidence does not compel the conclusion his proposed social group was a socially distinct segment of Honduran society that shared an immutable characteristic. See Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012). Along that line, our court lacks jurisdiction to consider his claim he belongs to a group comprised of young, male, Christian missionaries because it was not exhausted before the BIA. See Omari v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 318– 19 (5th Cir. 2009); Wang v. Ashcroft, 260 F.3d 448, 452–53 (5th Cir. 2001). And, because Baquedano has not shown the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that reached by the BIA on whether he is entitled to asylum, Zhao, 404 F.3d at 306, he concomitantly cannot show he is entitled to withholding of removal. Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir. 2002). DENIED. 2 18-60180 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ca5 5th Cir. Michael Baquedano-Ordonez v. William Barr, U. S. A 26 February 2019 Immigration Unpublished 4b286902d63d852866ba49e4228aad09663f072a
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals