NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 20-2485 ______________ TOMAS CANAS MEJIA, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Petition for Review of an Administrative Order of Removal of the Department of Homeland Security (A098-358-380) Immigration Judge: Mirlande Tadal ______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) March 25, 2021 ______________ Before: HARDIMAN, GREENAWAY, JR., and BIBAS, Circuit Judges. (Opinion Filed: May 5, 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. Tomas Canas Mejia petitions for review of a decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) concluding that he was not entitled to relief from reinstatement of a prior order of removal. The IJ concurred with the asylum officer’s conclusion that Mejia had neither a reasonable fear of persecution based on his race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group—as required for withholding of removal—nor a reasonable fear of torture, as required for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Finding that substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision and that this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the unexhausted particular social group before the IJ, we will deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. I. Background Mejia, a native and citizen of Guatemala, first entered the United States in September 2004. He was ordered removed from the United States on April 15, 2005, and pursuant to that order was removed to Guatemala on June 13, 2008. Mejia subsequently reentered the United States in December 2008, and has lived in the United States continuously since 2008. On February 3, 2020, the Department of Homeland Security issued Mejia a “Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order.” While in detention, Mejia expressed a fear of returning to Guatemala. As a result, he was referred to an asylum officer for a reasonable fear interview. 8 C.F.R. § 208.31(b). 2 Mejia told the asylum officer that, upon his return to Guatemala in 2008, he received an unsigned letter at his parents’ house asking for money. He also stated that he received phone calls asking for money. These requests were accompanied with threats against Mejia and his family. Mejia believed the letters and phone calls were being made by the gang MS-18, who assumed that Mejia had money, given that he had returned from the United States. II. Discussion We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). Romero v. Att’y Gen., 972 F.3d 334, 340 (3d Cir. 2020). We review an IJ’s factual findings in reasonable fear proceedings for substantial evidence. Id. at 342. This is an “extraordinarily deferential standard,” where we uphold the IJ’s findings if they are “supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Id. at 340 (quoting Garcia v. Att’y Gen., 665 F.3d 496, 502 (3d Cir. 2011)). “When we review for substantial evidence, ‘findings of fact are conclusive …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals