Portillo Ramirez v. Garland

Case: 22-60127 Document: 00516578182 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/14/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 22-60127
Summary Calendar FILED
December 14, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce
Alex Leonel Portillo Ramirez; Breylin Elizabeth Clerk
Portillo Menocal,
Petitioners,
versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Agency Nos. A216 599 250, A216 599 251
Before Jolly, Jones, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Alex Leonel Portillo-Ramirez and his minor daughter, Breylin
Elizabeth Portillo-Menocal (Breylin), natives and citizens of Honduras,
petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
dismissing their appeal from the denial by the immigration judge (IJ) of their
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-60127 Document: 00516578182 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/14/2022
No. 22-60127
Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review for substantial evidence, see
Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 219, 224 (5th Cir. 2019); and consider the
IJ’s decision only insofar as it influenced the BIA, see Singh v. Sessions, 880
F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018).
The IJ’s specific and accurate recitation of the record evidence belies
Portillo-Ramirez’s and Breylin’s claim that the agency disregarded evidence
of past persecution and demonstrates that substantial evidence supports the
agency’s determination that Portillo-Ramirez and Breylin are ineligible for
asylum. See Martinez-Guevara v. Garland, 27 F.4th 353, 362 (5th Cir. 2022);
Gonzales-Veliz, 938 F.3d at 224. Neither the petitioners’ citation of out-of-
circuit precedent nor their reiteration of testimony that criminal gangs tried
unsuccessfully through threatening telephone calls to extort money from
Portillo-Ramirez as a shop owner compels the conclusion that they suffered
past persecution or had a well-founded fear of future persecution on the basis
of his membership in a particular social group of business owners and street
vendors susceptible to extortion. See Vasquez-Guerra v. Garland, 7 F.4th 265,
269 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1228 (2022); Gjetani v. Barr, 968
F.3d 393, 398 (5th Cir. 2020); Qorane v. Barr, 919 F.3d 904, 910 (5th Cir.
2019).
Because Portillo-Ramirez and Breylin’s failure to show past
persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution based on a protected
ground is dispositive of their request for asylum, we do not consider their
remaining arguments on that issue. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25
(1976). Moreover, their failure to satisfy the asylum standard, see Gonzales-
Veliz, 938 F.3d at 224, prevents them from satisfying the more stringent
standard for withholding of removal, Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th
Cir. 2002).
2
Case: 22-60127 Document: 00516578182 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/14/2022
No. 22-60127
Portillo-Ramirez and Breylin’s challenge to the denial of relief under
the CAT is similarly unavailing. They identify no record evidence
compelling a conclusion contrary to the agency’s determination that they
failed to show they more likely than not would be tortured with official
acquiescence if returned to Honduras. See Gonzales-Veliz, 938 F.3d at 224;
Ramirez-Mejia v. Lynch, 794 F.3d 485, 493 (5th Cir. 2015).
The petition for review is DENIED.
3