NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 20-1132 ______________ OMAR VACARO CARGOSO a/k/a Omar Vaquero Cardoso, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (A077-937-545) Immigration Judge: Jason L. Pope ______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) December 17, 2020 ______________ Before: GREENAWAY, JR., SHWARTZ, and FUENTES, Circuit Judges. (Opinion Filed: April 21, 2021) ______________ OPINION * ______________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. GREENAWAY, JR., Circuit Judge. Omar Vacaro Cargoso petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal and affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision to deny his request for withholding of removal under the Immigration and Naturalization Act (“INA”). For the reasons that follow, we will dismiss the petition for review. I. Background Cargoso, a native and citizen of Mexico, arrived in the United States in 1995 after the gang Los Vatos Locos tried to recruit him. In February 2001, Cargoso was ordered removed to Mexico. Later that same month, Cargoso left Mexico and returned to the United States. In 2018, the Department of Homeland Security reinstated the February 2001 removal order. Because Cargoso expressed a fear of returning to Mexico, he was referred to an asylum officer for a reasonable fear interview pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(b). The asylum officer concluded that Cargoso did not have a reasonable fear of return to Mexico. Thereafter, Cargoso requested review of the negative reasonable fear determination by an IJ. The IJ found that Cargoso had established a reasonable fear of persecution and referred the matter to “withholding-only” proceedings pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(g)(2). Subsequently, Cargoso submitted an application for withholding of removal under 2 the INA and the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In his application, Cargoso asserted that he fears that he would be killed or tortured by Los Vatos Locos because they had threatened him in the past, had extorted his father, and had killed his first cousin and nephew. Cargoso, his sister, and his aunt testified before the IJ in support of his application. Cargoso also argued, inter alia, before the IJ that his life or freedom was threatened on account of his membership in three particular social groups: (1) “males of the Vaquero Cardoso family who have been the victims of repeated criminal attacks, including extortion and murder, at the hands of the Vatos Locos gang;” (2) “males who refuse to join the criminal gang of Vatos Locos;” and (3) “Mexican adult males who have already lost male family members to gang violence and are more vulnerable to gang violence themselves.” 1 A.R. 469–70. After a hearing, the IJ denied Cargoso’s application for withholding for removal and protection under CAT, despite finding Cargoso credible. The IJ determined that Cargoso did not suffer harm rising to the level of past persecution and, as …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals