NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 17 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VICTOR ISMAEL CANAS HERRERA, No. 20-71834 Petitioner, Agency No. A209-226-702 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney Gen- eral, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 12, 2022** San Francisco, California Before: O’SCANNLAIN and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges, and BAKER,*** Interna- tional Trade Judge. Victor Ismael Canas Herrera, a citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision dismissing his appeal from the order * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honorable M. Miller Baker, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. of an Immigration Judge (IJ) denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal.1 We review the legal question of whether a particular social group is cog- nizable de novo and we review the agency’s factual findings for substantial evi- dence. See Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241–42 (9th Cir. 2020); Yali Wang v. Sessions, 861 F.3d 1003, 1007 (9th Cir. 2017). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. To be eligible for asylum or withholding of removal, applicants must establish a nexus between the persecution suffered and a protected ground, such as “national- ity, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (asylum); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A) (withholding of removal); see also Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 357 (9th Cir. 2017). Before the IJ, Canas Herrera sought asylum and withholding based on politi- cal opinion and membership in a particular social group he identified as “[y]oung men who are sought by criminal organizations to participate in their groups and gangs.” The IJ found that Canas Herrera failed to show he was harmed based on political opinion or membership in a cognizable particular social group. On appeal to the BIA, rather than contesting the IJ’s finding that he failed to claim membership 1 Canas Herrera initially sought protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). But the BIA found that Canas Herrera failed to exhaust any challenge to the denial of CAT relief and deemed it waived. Canas Herrera does not challenge that decision on appeal, and we do not address it. 2 in a “cognizable particular social group,” Canas Herrera instead claimed member- ship in two new particular social groups: (1) “returning aliens from the US who will be visible targets of extortion, criminality, forced recruitment into gangs” and (2) “assimilated recent deportees.” The BIA found Canas Herrera’s arguments about these two new social groups to be barred because of his failure to raise them before the IJ. On petition to this court, Canas Herrera fails to …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals