Hugo Perez v. Loretta Lynch , 606 F. App'x 254 ( 2015 )

Case: 14-60448 Document: 00513075418 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/11/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 14-60448 June 11, 2015
Summary Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
HUGO ALBERTO PEREZ, also known as Hugo Albert Moreno,
Petitioner
v.
LORETTA LYNCH, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A201 064 108
Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Hugo Alberto Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ dismissal of his appeal of the immigration
judge’s denial of his application for withholding of removal. Perez argues that
the agency erred in denying his application for withholding of removal. He
asserts that he established past persecution and a well-founded fear of future
persecution based upon his membership in a particular social group, namely,
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-60448 Document: 00513075418 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/11/2015
No. 14-60448
people who have been threatened and harmed by gangs based on their refusal
to join the gang. He further contends that Mexican authorities are unwilling
or unable to protect him.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Perez’s application
for withholding of removal. We have previously rejected a similar argument
that young men who were recruited by criminal gangs constitute a particular
social group because the proposed group lacked the necessary social visibility
and did not meet the particularity test. See Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685
F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012). Perez has not shown that his claim is
distinguishable from that alleged in Orellana-Monson. Therefore, he has not
shown that the evidence compels a conclusion that it is more likely than not
that he will be persecuted on account of his membership in this particular
social group if he is removed to Mexico. See Orellana-Monson, 685 F.3d at 518;
Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005) .
The petition for review is DENIED.
2