Jacqueline Valle-Vasquez v. Merrick Garland ( 2023 )

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1175 Doc: 25 Filed: 12/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1175
JACQUELINE VALLE-VASQUEZ; A.P.V.R.,
Petitioners,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: December 19, 2023 Decided: December 21, 2023
Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Victor E. Legorreta, Michael E. Rosado, LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL E.
ROSADO, P.C., Laurel, Maryland, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Julie M. Iversen, Senior Litigation Counsel, Robert Michael
Stalzer, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1175 Doc: 25 Filed: 12/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Jacqueline Valle-Vasquez and her minor daughter, A.P.V.R., natives and citizens of
El Salvador, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying Valle-Vasquez’s
applications for asylum and withholding of removal. 1 We deny the petition for review. 2
We have reviewed the administrative record, including the transcript of the merits
hearing and all supporting evidence, and considered the arguments pressed on appeal in
conjunction with the record and the relevant authorities. We conclude that the record
evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the agency’s factual findings, see 8
U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the immigration judge’s
dispositive ruling, affirmed by the Board, that Valle-Vasquez failed to establish the
requisite nexus between the claimed protected ground and the asserted past persecution or
the feared future persecution, see Toledo-Vasquez v. Garland, 27 F.4th 281, 287-91 (4th
Cir. 2022) (reiterating that not every threat that relates to a noncitizen’s “family member is
made on account of family ties” and that “the nexus requirement is primarily about the
1
Although Valle-Vasquez argues that the agency erred in not considering if
A.P.V.R. could assert an independent claim for relief, the record confirms that counsel
advanced A.P.V.R. as a rider on Valle-Vasquez’s application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(3).
We thus discern no error in this regard.
2
We observe that Valle-Vasquez has forfeited review of the denial of relief under
the Convention Against Torture by failing to raise that issue in her brief in this court. See
Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A); Ullah v. Garland, 72 F.4th 597, 602 (4th Cir. 2023)
(explaining that a party forfeits appellate review of those issues and claims not raised in
the party’s briefs).
2
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1175 Doc: 25 Filed: 12/21/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
persecutor’s reasons for targeting an individual” (internal quotation marks omitted));
Cedillos-Cedillos v. Barr, 962 F.3d 817, 824-26 (4th Cir. 2020) (explaining that, in
conducting substantial evidence review of the agency’s nexus determination, this court “is
limited to considering whether their conclusion is supported by reasonable, substantial, and
probative evidence” (internal quotation marks omitted)). See generally Velasquez v.
Sessions, 866 F.3d 188, 195-96 (4th Cir. 2017) (recognizing the established principle that
“the asylum statute was not intended as a panacea for the numerous personal altercations
that invariably characterize economic and social relationships” and distinguishing the type
of personally motivated conflicts that generally “fall[ ] outside the scope of asylum
protection” (cleaned up)).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. See In re Valle-Vasquez (B.I.A. Jan.
18, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3