Maria Gamez Lopez v. William Barr


FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 30 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIA LORENA GAMEZ LOPEZ, No. 18-71019 Petitioner, Agency No. A209-135-626 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted October 21, 2020 San Francisco, California Before: HAWKINS, N.R. SMITH, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges. Maria Gamez Lopez, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing the appeal of the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition in part, grant the petition in part, and remand. 1. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Gamez Lopez did not establish past persecution, because she failed to establish membership in her proposed social groups (“Honduran women unable to leave a domestic relationship” or “Honduran women viewed as property by virtue of their status in a domestic relationship”) during any of the instances of harm. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (per curiam). A. The BIA reasonably concluded that, as a kidnapping victim, Gamez Lopez was not in a “domestic relationship” with her kidnapper (Santos Jovanni Martinez Lopez (“Santos”)) during the three months she was held hostage, but rather was a “victim of a heinous criminal act.” See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1189 (9th Cir. 2006) (noting that if evidence is “susceptible to more than one rational interpretation,” this court “may not substitute [its] judgment for that of the IJ”). 2 B. The BIA reasonably concluded that Gamez Lopez failed to establish that she was unable to leave the domestic relationship.1 First, following Gamez Lopez’s escape from Santos, she was able to physically escape and live separately for twelve years without any in person contact with Santos. During this time, Gamez Lopez also entered into two significant relationships (each of which resulted in a child). Second, while Gamez Lopez was living with Santos’s mother, Gamez Lopez was able to leave Santos, with the help of a pastor, after he became physically abusive. Gamez Lopez did not have any additional physical contact with Santos following this incident. Although Gamez Lopez would have us interpret the evidence differently, the evidence does not compel an interpretation contrary to that of the BIA.2 See id. 2. The BIA’s conclusion that Gamez Lopez did not have a well-founded fear of persecution, because she could relocate to avoid persecution is not supported by substantial evidence. Neither the IJ nor the BIA addressed whether Gamez Lopez 1 The BIA did not specifically mention either of Gamez Lopez’s social groups in its discussion. Rather, the BIA focused on ...

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