Ana Rodriguez-Perdomo v. William Barr, U. S. Atty

Case: 18-60555 Document: 00515116649 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/13/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 18-60555 September 13, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk ANA GLORIA RODRIGUEZ-PERDOMO, Petitioner v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 727 868 Before BARKSDALE, ELROD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ana Gloria Rodriguez-Perdomo seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision to deny her motion for a remand and to dismiss her appeal of the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of her motions for a continuance and applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Rodriguez contends, inter alia, her case should be remanded to the IJ for additional fact-finding regarding her alleged * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Case: 18-60555 Document: 00515116649 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/13/2019 No. 18-60555 past trauma. In support of this claim, Rodriguez contends the BIA abused its discretion in upholding the IJ’s denial of her continuance motions. In addition, Rodriguez contends, inter alia, the IJ and BIA failed to consider the entire record in reviewing her CAT-protection claim. On 3 May 2014, Rodriguez and her minor daughter, both natives and citizens of El Salvador, entered the United States without being legally admitted. Three days later, the Department of Homeland Security issued each of them a Notice to Appear, claiming removability. On 29 April 2016, Rodriguez admitted the allegations against herself and her daughter, and the IJ found them both removable. Acting on behalf of both, Rodriguez applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT. The IJ scheduled a hearing on the application for 21 June 2017, advising any supplemental documents would be due 30 days prior. Within 30 days of her hearing, Rodriguez sought a continuance for psychological evaluation based on previously undisclosed past experiences and to supplement her claims based on the “new proposed social group based on family” that had recently been recognized in Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I. & N. Dec. 40, 40 (B.I.A. 2017), rev’d in pertinent part, 27 I & N. Dec. 581, 596 (Op. Att’y Gen. 2019). Also within 30 days of her hearing, Rodriguez submitted, inter alia, affidavits related to threats she received from gang members. Referencing the amount of preparation time Rodriguez already had, the IJ denied her motions, as well as her motion for reconsideration. The IJ did state, however, that Rodriguez would be allowed to add an additional social group at the time of the hearing. After her hearing, the IJ denied Rodriguez’ applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. The BIA, inter alia, dismissed her appeal. 2 Case: 18-60555 Document: 00515116649 Page: 3 Date Filed: ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals