17-1560 Santos-Garcia v. Barr BIA Weisel, IJ A206 793 723/724 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. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 14th day of August, two thousand nineteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 RICHARD C. WESLEY, 8 PETER W. HALL, 9 DENNY CHIN, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 NORMA ELOGIA SANTOS-GARCIA, 14 SHELSON EDUARDO MELENDEZ-SANTOS, 15 Petitioners, 16 17 v. 17-1560 18 NAC 19 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 25 FOR PETITIONERS: Heather Y. Axford, Central 26 American Legal Assistance, 27 Brooklyn, NY. 28 29 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant 30 Attorney General; Nelle M. 31 Seymour, Trial Attorney, Office of 32 Immigration Litigation, United 1 States Department of Justice, 2 Washington, DC. 3 4 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 5 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 6 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 7 is DENIED. 8 Petitioners Norma Elogia Santos-Garcia and her son, 9 Shelson Eduardo Melendez-Santos, natives and citizens of 10 Honduras, seek review of an April 12, 2017, decision of the 11 BIA affirming a July 29, 2016, decision of an Immigration 12 Judge (“IJ”) denying Santos-Garcia’s application for asylum, 13 withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention 14 Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Norma Elogia Santos-Garcia, 15 Shelson Eduardo Melendez-Santos, Nos. A 206 793 723/724 16 (B.I.A. Apr. 12, 2017), aff’g Nos. A 206 793 723/724 (Immig. 17 Ct. N.Y. City July 29, 2016). We assume the parties’ 18 familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history 19 in this case. 20 Under the circumstances of this case, we have considered 21 the entirety of the IJ’s decision as well as the BIA’s 22 additional statement regarding social group. See Ming Xia 23 Chen v. BIA, 435 F.3d 141, 144 (2d Cir. 2006); Yan Chen v. 24 Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). The applicable 2 1 standards of review are well established. See 8 U.S.C. 2 § 1252(b)(4)(B); Paloka v. Holder, 762 F.3d 191, 195 (2d Cir. 3 2014)(reviewing factual findings for substantial evidence and 4 questions of law and application of law to fact de novo). 5 To demonstrate eligibility for asylum ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals