Andres-Mateo v. Garland

Appellate Case: 21-9505 Document: 010110725696 Date Filed: 08/17/2022 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT August 17, 2022 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court FELIPE ANDRES-MATEO, Petitioner, v. No. 21-9505 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before HARTZ, HOLMES, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioner Felipe Andres-Mateo is a native and citizen of Guatemala. An immigration judge (IJ) denied his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the denial. Petitioner now challenges the denial of withholding of * 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 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.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. Appellate Case: 21-9505 Document: 010110725696 Date Filed: 08/17/2022 Page: 2 removal.1 Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), we deny his petition for review. BACKGROUND Twice in 2012 Petitioner entered the United States without valid entry documents. Border agents apprehended him in May 2012, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) removed him in June. He then reentered the country illegally in August. In 2020 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers apprehended Petitioner, and DHS reinstated its removal order. An asylum officer conducted a reasonable-fear interview and determined that Petitioner had not established past persecution or torture, or a reasonable fear of future persecution or torture. Petitioner challenged that determination, and an IJ vacated the asylum officer’s decision after a hearing. Proceeding pro se, Petitioner applied for withholding of removal and protection under the CAT on the ground that he fears death at the hands of Mara 18 gang members upon his return to Guatemala. 1 Petitioner does not challenge the denial of CAT relief, so we do not address that issue. See Addo v. Barr, 982 F.3d 1263, 1266 n.2 (10th Cir. 2020) (“Issues not raised in the opening brief are deemed abandoned or waived . . . .” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Habecker v. Town of Estes Park, 518 F.3d 1217, 1223 n.6 (10th Cir. 2008) (court will not consider claim if party “has failed to advance reasoned argument as to the grounds for the appeal” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted)). 2 Appellate Case: 21-9505 Document: 010110725696 Date Filed: 08/17/2022 Page: 3 At the hearing before the IJ, Petitioner testified that he purchased a plot of land in Guatemala in March 2012, but shortly thereafter he went to the United States “to fight for a better life.” Admin. R. at 107. After his deportation in …

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