NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ No. 17-3527 ________________ ODALIS ZULEYMA SANDOVAL-ALONZO; *B. N. C-S, Petitioners v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent * (Amended per Clerk’s Order of 2/14/18) ________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency Nos. A208-168-313 & A208-168-314) Immigration Judge: Eva S. Saltzman ________________ Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on July 12, 2018 Before: SHWARTZ, ROTH and RENDELL, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: May 21, 2019) ________________ OPINION ________________ This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. ROTH, Circuit Judge. Odalis Zuleyma Sandoval-Alonzo and her minor son B. N. C-S. petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order denying their motion to reconsider the denial of their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We will deny the petition for review. I. Sandoval and her son are natives and citizens of Guatemala. They fled Guatemala in April 2015, several months after Sandoval’s boyfriend, who was the father of her son, was killed by gang members seeking to extort him. In May 2015, after illegally entering the United States, Sandoval and her son were apprehended near the southern border by immigration officers. Having entered the country without inspection or parole, they were served with notices to appear and placed in removal proceedings.1 On November 10, 2015, they appeared before an immigration judge (IJ) and conceded inadmissibility. That same day, Sandoval filed an application for asylum and withholding of removal on her own behalf and on behalf of her son. In October 2016, the IJ held a hearing on the application. At the hearing, Sandoval credibly testified that, inter alia, she was afraid of returning to Guatemala because she believed she would be killed or extorted by the unidentified gang members who killed her son’s father for refusing their extortionate demands. To further 1 The notices charged them with inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). They were eventually released on their own recognizance after reporting to a Department of Homeland Security field office in Trenton, New Jersey. 2 substantiate her claim, Sandoval submitted documentary evidence, including country conditions reports and related newspaper articles. After the hearing, the IJ issued a decision denying their application for relief in its entirety. The IJ reasoned that Sandoval had failed to establish (i) an objectively reasonable fear of persecution, and (ii) a nexus between her fear of persecution and her membership in a “particular social group,” i.e., the family of individuals targeted for extortion by gangs. The IJ also rejected relief to the extent that Sandoval claimed to fear return to Guatemala because criminals in her home country might perceive her to be wealthy. Sandoval appealed to the BIA. On April 19, 2017, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision. Adopting much of the IJ’s reasoning, the BIA concluded that Sandoval had not met her burden of demonstrating that her subjective fear ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals