Saucedo-Miranda v. Barr


FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT September 17, 2019 _________________________________ Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court JUAN SAUCEDO-MIRANDA, a/k/a Antonio Garcia-Reyna, a/k/a Jose Lopez, a/k/a Juan Medina, Petitioner, v. No. 18-9578 (Petition for Review) WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, ∗ Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT ** _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, BALDOCK and HARTZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Juan Saucedo-Miranda, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial by the ∗ In accordance with Rule 43(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, William P. Barr is substituted for Matthew G. Whitaker as the respondent in this action. ** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. immigration judge (IJ) of his applications for asylum, restriction on removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, we deny review. BACKGROUND Mr. Saucedo-Miranda is subject to removal because he entered this country without being admitted or paroled after inspection. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). After receiving a notice to appear, he conceded removability and applied for asylum, restriction on removal, and CAT relief. Mr. Saucedo-Miranda’s applications are based on violent attacks on him and his family in Mexico. First, in or about 1994, when he was ten, his father’s employer raped him and threatened to fire his father if he spoke about the attack. Second, in more recent years multiple members of his family suffered violent attacks. In 2011 intruders entered the family’s home, beat several family members, and kidnapped his brother Omar for three days. The next year, his brother Iran was robbed, beaten, and shot as he came home from driving his taxi, and one of the attackers later fired shots outside the family’s house. In 2013 his brother-in-law was kidnapped, then tortured and killed when the family could not assemble a ransom. In 2017 his father was robbed and beaten while shopping. And in late 2017 or early 2018 his family received a phone call stating that Mr. Saucedo-Miranda himself had been kidnapped. For both asylum and restriction on removal, a petitioner must demonstrate he has been or will be harmed because of one or more protected grounds listed in the statutes. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (asylum); id. § 1231(b)(3)(A) (restriction 2 on removal). As relevant to this proceeding, Mr. Saucedo-Miranda chose the protected category of “membership in a particular social group,” id. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i); ...

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