Case: 18-60738 Document: 00516221394 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. 18-60738 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Juana Del Transito Valdez-De Martinez; Diego Enrique Martinez-Valdez; Erika Maria Martinez-Valdez, Petitioners, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 900 335 No. A208 900 336 No. A208 899 547 Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Juana Del Transito Valdez-De Martinez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, on behalf of herself and her two minor children, petitions this court * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 18-60738 Document: 00516221394 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/02/2022 No. 18-60738 for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. She argues that the immigration judge (IJ) and the BIA erred by concluding that she failed to demonstrate a nexus between her particular social group (PSG) and the harm she suffered. She further argues that the BIA failed to consider new evidence that, if considered, would have warranted granting her relief from removal. Because Valdez-De Martinez has not briefed any challenge to the denial of her application for relief under the Convention Against Torture, she has abandoned the issue. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). There is no merit to Valdez-De Martinez’s complaint that, due to interpreter error, the IJ did not consider the police report made by her husband. This evidence was contained in the record, and the pertinent information was not in dispute. To the extent that the evidence could be construed as a motion for remand, the BIA denied the motion. This court reviews the BIA’s denial of a request for a remand “under a highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.” Milat v. Holder, 755 F.3d 354, 365 (5th Cir. 2014) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The BIA relied on its own rules and a determination that, in light of the record, Valdez-De Martinez’s proffered evidence did not warrant remand. This ruling was not an abuse of discretion. See id. On review of an order of the BIA, this court examines “the BIA’s decision and only consider[s] the IJ’s decision to the extent that it influenced the BIA.” Shaikh v. Holder, 588 F.3d 861, 863 (5th Cir. 2009). Because the BIA agreed with the IJ’s analysis and conclusions, this court reviews both decisions. Shaikh, 588 F.3d at 863. 2 Case: 18-60738 Document: 00516221394 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/02/2022 No. 18-60738 The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General have the discretion to grant asylum to refugees. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1). The applicant seeking asylum is required …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals