NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 19a0133n.06 No. 18-3334 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED WILLIAM YOVANNY GONZALEZ-VALENCIA, ) Mar 19, 2019 ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE UNITED STATES WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General ) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION ) APPEALS Respondent. ) ) Before: GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges. KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. William Yovanny Gonzalez-Valencia, a citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. His lone argument on appeal is that the Board erred by relying on its earlier precedent. We see no error and thus deny his petition. I. In December 2015, Gonzalez-Valencia crossed the United States border from Mexico into Texas. The Department of Homeland Security arrested him the same day. Soon thereafter, the government began removal proceedings, alleging that Gonzalez-Valencia was removable because he had no visa or entry document. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). Gonzalez-Valencia conceded that he was removable, but applied for asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b), withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A), and protection under the Convention Against Torture, 8 No. 18-3334, Gonzalez-Valencia v. Barr C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). To obtain asylum or withholding of removal, Gonzalez-Valencia must show that he has, at least, a “well-founded fear of persecution on account of . . . membership in a particular social group.” See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A); Umana-Ramos v. Holder, 724 F.3d 667, 674 (6th Cir. 2013). In his application, Gonzalez-Valencia argued that he would be persecuted for (among other things) belonging to a “particular social group” composed of “young men of gang age.” The Immigration Judge denied Gonzalez Valencia’s application for several reasons. As relevant here, the IJ held that a social group comprising “young men of gang age” did not qualify as a “particular social group” under the statute. The IJ also determined that Gonzalez-Valencia had failed to show that he would be tortured if he returned to El Salvador. Gonzalez-Valencia appealed the IJ’s decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, arguing for the first time that he would be persecuted for belonging to a “particular social group” composed of “poor male youth.” The Board affirmed the IJ’s denial of Gonzalez-Valencia’s application, holding (among other things) that he had forfeited this argument by failing to raise it before the IJ. To support this holding, the Board relied on its earlier decision in Matter of W-Y-C & H-O-B, 27 I. & N. Dec. 189 (BIA 2018). Gonzalez-Valencia then filed this petition for review of the Board’s decision. II. Gonzalez-Valencia’s petition challenges only the Board’s application of its earlier decision in Matter of W-Y-C. He primarily argues that Matter of W-Y-C was wrongly decided. We review questions of law de novo. See Khalili v. Holder, 557 F.3d 429, 435 (6th Cir. 2016). In Matter of W-Y-C, the Board refused to consider an applicant’s argument ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals