From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

De Franco v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 13, 2014
575 F. App'x 730 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 11-71228 Agency No. A098-589-371 Agency No. A098-589-372 Agency No. A098-589-373

05-13-2014

MERCEDES DE JESUS SANCHEZ DE FRANCO; et al., Petitioners, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Mercedes de Jesus Sanchez de Franco and her children, natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings. Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 742 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's denial of CAT relief because petitioners did not demonstrate that it is more likely than not they will be tortured if returned to El Salvador. See Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1196-97 (9th Cir. 2003).

In denying petitioners' asylum and withholding of removal claims, the BIA found they failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case they did not have the benefit of either this court's decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), and Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), or the BIA's decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we grant the petition as to petitioners' asylum and withholding of removal claims, and remand to the agency to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam).

The parties shall bear their own costs for this petition for review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED.


Summaries of

De Franco v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 13, 2014
575 F. App'x 730 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

De Franco v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:MERCEDES DE JESUS SANCHEZ DE FRANCO; et al., Petitioners, v. ERIC H…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 13, 2014

Citations

575 F. App'x 730 (9th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Aguilar-Aguilar v. Lynch

In all twelve of these cases—and unlike in Aguilar-Aguilar's case—the BIA had issued a decision before either…