Felix Pedro-Quezada v. Loretta E. Lynch


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Morris S. Arnold and Lavenski R. Smith (UNPUBLISHED) [4369384] [15-2041]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2041 ___________________________ Felix Pedro-Quezada lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: February 17, 2016 Filed: February 22, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 15-2041 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/22/2016 Entry ID: 4369384 Felix Pedro-Quezada, a citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) denying him withholding of removal.1 Pedro-Quezada challenges the IJ’s determination that he failed to establish past persecution, or a well-founded fear of future persecution, based on a protected ground. After careful consideration, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding that Pedro-Quezada did not show a clear probability that his life or freedom in Honduras would be threatened upon return, due to a protected ground, see De Castro-Gutierrez v. Holder, 713 F.3d 375, 379-80 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review), because the two groups in which he asserts membership are not cognizable as particular social groups for purposes of immigration relief, see Matul-Hernandez v. Holder, 685 F.3d 707, 711-13 (8th Cir. 2012) (individuals returning from United States and perceived as wealthy do not constitute recognized social group); see also Gaitan v. Holder, 671 F.3d 678, 680-82 (8th Cir. 2012) (young males who have rejected or resisted gang recruitment do not constitute recognized particular social group; petitioner was no different than any other citizen who experienced gang violence). The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The IJ also denied his applications for asylum and protection under the Convention Against Torture, but those rulings are not before this court. See ChayVelasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004). -2- Appellate Case: 15-2041 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/22/2016 Entry ID: 4369384

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?