Villanueva v. Garland ( 2023 )

Case: 23-60223 Document: 00516896085 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/14/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________ United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 23-60223 FILED
September 14, 2023
Summary Calendar
____________ Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Jaquelin Aracely Villanueva,
Petitioner,
versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
______________________________
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Agency No. A206 687 408
______________________________
Before Jones, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Jaquelin Aracely Villanueva, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
(BIA) upholding the denial of her application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
Regarding asylum and withholding of removal, she claimed that she was
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-60223 Document: 00516896085 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/14/2023
No. 23-60223
persecuted by her domestic partner on account of her membership in a
particular social group (PSG), namely “Guatemalan wom[e]n who, because
of social and economic positions in Guatemalan society, are disenfranchised
to a degree that it makes it impossible for them to live independently from
their abusive male family members and partners.”
We review the BIA’s decision and consider the immigration judge’s
decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Orellana-Monson v. Holder,
685 F.3d 511, 517 (5th Cir. 2012). The BIA’s factual determination that an
individual is not eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT relief is
reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Chen v. Gonzales, 470
F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). Under that standard, “[t]he petitioner has
the burden of showing that the evidence is so compelling that no reasonable
factfinder could reach a contrary conclusion.” Orellana-Monson, 685 F.3d at
518 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
To be cognizable, a PSG must be (1) comprised of persons who share
an immutable characteristic, (2) particularly defined, and (3) socially distinct
within the society at issue. Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 219, 229 (5th Cir.
2019). Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that
Villanueva’s proposed PSG lacked the requisite social distinction. She has
not shown that the evidence compels the conclusion that members of her
proposed PSG are perceived in Guatemalan society as a discrete social group.
See Jaco v. Garland, 24 F.4th 395, 407 (5th Cir. 2021); Hernandez-De La Cruz
v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 786-87 (5th Cir. 2016). She thus cannot demonstrate
eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See Orellana-Monson, 685
F.3d at 522.
To obtain protection under the CAT, the applicant must demonstrate
that, in the proposed country of removal, it is more likely than not that she
would be tortured by, or with the acquiescence of, a public official or other
2
Case: 23-60223 Document: 00516896085 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/14/2023
No. 23-60223
person acting in an official capacity. See Martinez Manzanares v. Barr, 925
F.3d 222, 228 (5th Cir. 2019). “[A] government’s inability to protect its
citizens does not amount to acquiescence.” Id. at 229 (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted). Villanueva has not shown that the evidence
compels the conclusion that any potential torture would entail the requisite
state action or acquiescence. See id.The petition for review is DENIED.
3