Appellate Case: 20-9641 Document: 010110616046 Date Filed: 12/08/2021 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT December 8, 2021 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court IVIS N. VAZQUEZ; BLANCA MARLENE GUTIERREZ-DE VASQUEZ; H. VASQUEZ-GUTIERREZ; E. VASQUEZ-GUTIERREZ, Petitioners, v. No. 20-9641 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, MORITZ, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Ivis N. Vazquez, his wife, and his two children, are natives and citizens of El Salvador who entered the United States without permission. An immigration judge (IJ) found them removable and ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed in a single-member summary disposition. Vazquez and his * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 20-9641 Document: 010110616046 Date Filed: 12/08/2021 Page: 2 family now petition for review of that decision. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), and we deny the petition. I. STANDARD OF REVIEW We review the BIA’s decision, but we may consult the IJ’s more-complete discussion of the same grounds relied upon by the BIA. Uanreroro v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 1197, 1204 (10th Cir. 2006). “[W]e will not affirm on grounds raised in the IJ decision unless they are relied upon by the BIA in its affirmance.” Id. “[A]dministrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). II. BACKGROUND & PROCEDURAL HISTORY Vazquez and his family entered the United States in July 2016 by crossing the Rio Grande near Hidalgo, Texas. They soon applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. Vazquez’s wife and children applied as derivative beneficiaries of Vazquez himself. We therefore do not separately discuss their eligibility for relief. As an asylum applicant, Vazquez must establish he suffered or reasonably fears suffering persecution “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A). At his asylum hearing, the IJ asked, “[W]hat are the particular social groups . . . in this case?” R. at 129. Vazquez’s attorney responded by identifying a “political [sic] social group” described as “victims of threats from . . . MS gang members in El Salvador.” Id. Vazquez then testified that the MS gang took over his neighborhood 2 Appellate Case: 20-9641 Document: 010110616046 Date Filed: 12/08/2021 Page: 3 in El Salvador, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals