Case: 20-60709 Document: 00516221459 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/02/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 2, 2022 No. 20-60709 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Sandrah Ache Tegwi, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A213 315 740 Before Barksdale, Costa, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Sandrah Ache Tegwi, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). She asserts: the BIA * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60709 Document: 00516221459 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/02/2022 No. 20-60709 erred by not concluding she was a member of her proposed particular social group (PSG), claiming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) adverse-credibility finding did not cover this issue; her proposed PSG membership makes her eligible for relief; and her case should be remanded or reopened. In considering the BIA’s decision (and the IJ’s, to the extent it influenced the BIA), legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, factual findings for substantial evidence. E.g., Orellano-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517– 18 (5th Cir. 2012). Under the substantial-evidence standard, petitioner must demonstrate “the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could reach a contrary conclusion”. Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). An adverse-credibility determination is a factual finding. Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 220, 225 (5th Cir. 2018). Therefore, “if the IJ’s credibility determinations are supported by the record, they will be affirmed”. Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 537 (5th Cir. 2009). In making an adverse-credibility determination, the IJ “may rely on any inconsistency or omission . . . as long as the totality of the circumstances establishes that an asylum applicant is not credible”. Id. at 538 (citation omitted) (emphasis in original). The BIA’s decision was grounded in “specific and cogent reasons derived from the record”. See Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Tegwi does not show substantial evidence compels a contrary result. See Avelar-Oliva v. Barr, 954 F.3d 757, 772 (5th Cir. 2020) (denying petition for review because record did not support petitioner’s credibility). The adverse-credibility finding was a sufficient basis for the conclusion that Tegwi was ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal. Id. (explaining “adverse credibility determination prevents [petitioner] from satisfying her burden of establishing eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under CAT”). 2 Case: 20-60709 Document: 00516221459 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/02/2022 No. 20-60709 Additionally, her requested forms of relief are not predicated solely on PSG membership. To qualify for asylum, an applicant must demonstrate, inter alia, either past persecution, or a …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals