UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1585 PAULA VASQUEZ-GALDAMEZ; J.L.P.V.; J.A.P.V.; G.O.P.V., Petitioners, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Argued: September 8, 2020 Decided: October 14, 2020 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: Minh Nguyen-Dang, MAYER BROWN, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. Robert Dale Tennyson, Jr., UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C, for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Claudia R. Cubas, CAPITAL AREA IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS (CAIR) COALITION, Washington, D.C.; Evan M. Tager, MAYER BROWN LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Carl McIntyre, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Paula Vasquez-Galdamez (“Petitioner”) petitions this court for review of the denial of her petition for asylum. Petitioner argues that she was denied her due process and statutory rights to a fair hearing when the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denied her motion to reconsider in light of a fundamental change in law. As explained below, we decline to reach the question of whether there was a fundamental change in law such that Petitioner was deprived of a fair hearing because Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the outcome of her case would be different on remand in any event. Therefore, the petition for review is denied. I. Petitioner came to the United States from Honduras with three of her children in July 2015 after leaving a relationship with her abusive partner, José Adrian Amaya-Alvarez (“Amaya-Alvarez”). Petitioner’s relationship with Amaya-Alvarez began in 2006. Within six months, he became verbally abusive toward Petitioner and her children from a prior relationship. Amaya-Alvarez treated his own children preferentially and was physically and verbally abusive to Petitioner on several occasions. After one abusive incident, Petitioner filed a police report against Amaya-Alvarez. As a result, Amaya-Alvarez was arrested and detained for one day before being released. Petitioner and Amaya-Alvarez ultimately married in 2013. Amaya-Alvarez stated that he only married Petitioner so he would be entitled to half the value of the house they lived in, which Petitioner owned. But because 3 of the escalating physical abuse, Petitioner left Amaya-Alvarez and filed for asylum in the United States in July 2015. Petitioner relied on Matter of A-R-C-G-, 26 I&N Dec. 388, 392 (BIA 2014) to argue that she was eligible for asylum based on the particular social group of “Honduran women who are unable to leave their domestic relationship.” A.R. 254. 1 The immigration judge (“IJ”) denied Petitioner’s application for asylum. The IJ based his denial of Petitioner’s asylum claim on a finding that she did not provide evidence to corroborate her claim about the domestic violence she suffered or her attempts to leave Amaya-Alvarez. The IJ evaluated the rest of Petitioner’s claim in the alternative. First, the IJ held that Petitioner’s proposed ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals