From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Segovia v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 4, 2011
406 F. App'x 930 (5th Cir. 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-60372 Summary Calendar.

January 4, 2011.

Jesus A. Macias, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.

Joseph D. Hardy, Jr., Esq., Trial Attorney, Tangerlia Cox, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA No. A094 192 702.

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.


Carlos Gerder Edenor Segovia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the Immigration Judge's decision that he did not qualify for asylum or withholding of removal. Segovia contends he is entitled to asylum and withholding of removal because he has a well-founded fear of future persecution based on his membership in two particular social groups: those who refuse to join the guerillas; and those who are believed to be wealthy because they are returning from the United States.

Respondent maintains Segovia failed to exhaust his claim concerning those who resisted guerillas. Review of the record, however, shows that claim was sufficiently presented to the BIA. Oman v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 321-22 (5th Cir. 2009).

The BIA's decision is reviewed for substantial evidence. See Mikkael v. INS, 115 F.3d 299, 302 (5th Cir. 1997); Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Under this standard, the BIA's decision will not be reversed unless the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that reached by the BIA. See Chen, 470 F.3d at 1134.

Segovia has failed to produce sufficient evidence of a well-founded fear of future persecution based on his membership in a particular social group, and, therefore, is not entitled to relief. E.g., Tesfamichael v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 109, 113 (5th Cir. 2006). The suggested groups his claims are based upon are too general to comprise particular social groups for immigration purposes. Mwembie v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 405, 414-15 (5th Cir. 2006) (noting that to establish membership of particular social group, applicant must show member of group sharing common immutable characteristic); see also Sanchez-Trujillo v. INS, 801 F.2d 1571, 1576-77 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding class of young, working class, urban males too all-encompassing to meet requirements of particular social group); In re A-M-E J-G-U-, 24 I. N. Dec. 69, 74 (BIA 2007) (finding proposed group of wealthy Guatemalans "not so readily `identifiable' or sufficiently defined as to meet the requirements of a particular social group within the meaning of the refugee definition") (emphasis in original). Insofar as Segovia asserts he is entitled to relief because political unrest makes it unsafe for him to return to El Salvador, his claim is similarly unavailing. Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 190 (5th Cir. 2004) (holding "applicant's fear of persecution cannot he based solely on general violence and civil disorder").

DENIED.


Summaries of

Segovia v. Holder

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jan 4, 2011
406 F. App'x 930 (5th Cir. 2011)
Case details for

Segovia v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:Carlos Gerder Edenor SEGOVIA, Petitioner v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., U.S…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jan 4, 2011

Citations

406 F. App'x 930 (5th Cir. 2011)

Citing Cases

Gonzalez-Soto v. Lynch

Further, persons believed to be wealthy because they are returning to their home country from the United…

Duarte v. Garland

This court has repeatedly held, however, that "persons believed to be wealthy because they are returning to…