Opinion
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency Nos. A070-937-823, A099-967-395, A099-967-396.
MERIDA ESPERANZA HERNANDEZ, AKA Senaida Hernandez Lopez, Petitioner, Pro se, Las Vegas, NV.
For MERIDA ESPERANZA HERNANDEZ, AKA Senaida Hernandez Lopez, Petitioner: Dan M. Winder, Esquire, Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C., Las Vegas, NV.
FHILIPS A. POPPER HERNANDEZ, AKA Fhilips Alejandro Popper Hernandez, Petitioner, Pro se, Las Vegas, NV.
For FHILIPS A. POPPER HERNANDEZ, AKA Fhilips Alejandro Popper Hernandez, Petitioner: Dan M. Winder, Esquire, Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C., Las Vegas, NV.
LESTER E. POPPER HERNANDEZ, AKA Lester Eduardo Popper Hernandez, Petitioner, Pro se, Las Vegas, NV.
For LESTER E. POPPER HERNANDEZ, AKA Lester Eduardo Popper Hernandez, Petitioner: Dan M. Winder, Esquire, Law Office of Dan M. Winder, P.C., Las Vegas, NV.
For ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent: Regina Byrd, Esquire, Attorney, OIL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC; Chief Counsel ICE, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA.
Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Merida Esperanza Hernandez and her sons, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge's (" IJ" ) decision denying their applications for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Perdomo v. Holder, 611 F.3d 662, 665 (9th Cir. 2010). We grant the petition for review and we remand.
Petitioners claim past persecution and a fear of future persecution on account of Merida Hernandez's membership in a particular social group of uneducated impoverished Guatemalan women. The IJ rejected petitioners' proposed social group because it represented a " large segment" of the Guatemalan population. In light of our intervening decision in Perdomo, 611 F.3d 662, 669, we grant petitioners' petition for review and remand their asylum and withholding of removal claims for further proceedings consistent with this disposition. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam). In light of our remand, we do not reach petitioners' arguments in their motion to remand.
Finally, we grant petitioners' motion for stay of removal.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.