17-2536 (L) Rodas Rosales v. Barr BIA Weisel, IJ A202 126 402/403 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 15th day of December, two thousand twenty. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, PIERRE N. LEVAL, MICHAEL H. PARK, Circuit Judges.* _____________________________________ GERSON ELISEO RODAS ROSALES, M.R.G., Petitioners, v. 17-2536 (L); 18-1088 (Con) NAC WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ * Circuit Judge Peter W. Hall, originally a member of the panel, is currently unavailable. Circuit Judge Jon O. Newman has replaced Judge Hall on the panel for this matter. See 2d Cir. IOP E(b). FOR PETITIONERS: Andrea Sáenz, Brooklyn Defender Services, Brooklyn, NY. Nancy Morawetz, Jessica Swensen, Supervising Attorneys; Devika M. Balaram; Kevin Siegel, Student Interns, Washington Square Legal Services, Inc., New York, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General; Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director; Carmel A. Morgan, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. Petitioners Gerson Eliseo Rodas Rosales and M.R.G., natives and citizens of El Salvador, seek review of two BIA decisions: (1) a July 2017, decision affirming a November 2016, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Rodas Rosales’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”), and (2) a March 2018 decision denying a motion to reopen. In re Gerson Eliseo Rodas Rosales and M.R.G., No. A 202 126 402/403 (B.I.A. July 31, 2017), aff’g Nos. A 202 126 402/403 (Immig. 2 Ct. N.Y. City Nov. 16, 2016); In re Gerson Eliseo Rodas Rosales and M.R.G., Nos. A 202 126 402/403 (B.I.A. Mar. 22, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history. I. Lead Case Under the circumstances, we have reviewed the IJ’s decision as supplemented by the BIA. See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). We review the agency’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings under the substantial evidence standard. See Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 325, 332 (2d Cir. 2013). A. Asylum and Withholding of Removal For asylum and withholding of ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals