Hebert Osorio-Burgos v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Case: 10-60257 Document: 00511336640 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/30/2010
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-60257 S u m m a r y Calendar December 30, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk
H E B E R T OSORIO-BURGOS, also known as Herbert Osorio-Burgos, also known a s Hebert Josue Osorio Burgos, also known as Heberth Josue Osorio, also known a s Heberth Osorio, P e titio n e r v. E R I C H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, R espon dent
P e tit io n for Review of an Order of the B o a r d of Immigration Appeals B I A No. A088 059 589
B e fo r e JOLLY, GARZA, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* H e b e r t Osorio-Burgos, a citizen and native of Honduras, has filed a p e t it io n for review from the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) o f his request for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention A g a in s t Torture (CAT). He argues that the BIA erred when it determined that
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Case: 10-60257 Document: 00511336640 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/30/2010 No. 10-60257 t h e threats, harassment, and extortion perpetrated on him by gang members did n o t warrant relief from removal. O s o r io -B u r g o s does not challenge the determination by the immigration ju d g e (IJ) and the BIA that he was not entitled to relief under the CAT. He has t h e r e fo r e abandoned any challenge to this ruling. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F .3 d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003); Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 8 1 3 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Osorio-Burgos argues that the BIA erred in d e t e r m in in g that he was ineligible for asylum. However, because Osorio-Burgos d id not seek asylum before the IJ or the BIA, this court lacks jurisdiction to r e v ie w the claim. See Omari v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 317-19 (5th Cir. 2009). T h e IJ and the BIA determined that Osorio-Burgos's claim for withholding o f removal failed because he did not establish that the persecution was m o t iv a t e d by his membership in a particular social group. An applicant for w it h h o ld in g of removal has the burden of showing that it is "more likely than n o t" that his life or freedom would be threatened by persecution on account of r a c e , religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political o p in io n . 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3); Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 9 0 6 (5th Cir. 2002). Although Osorio-Brugos argues that he is member of a p a r tic u la r social group, he has failed to establish that he is a "member of a group o f persons that share a common immutable characteristic that they either c a n n o t change or should not be required to change because it is fundamental to t h e ir individual identities or consciences." See Mwembie v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 4 0 5 , 414-15 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?