Ana Lidia Bolanos-Salinas v. Eric Holder, Jr.

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 8 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANA LIDIA BOLANOS-SALINAS, No. 11-70011
Petitioner, Agency No. A072-514-746
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2014**
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ana Lidia Bolanos-Salinas, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
and withholding of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
dismiss in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand.
We lack jurisdiction to review Bolanos-Salinas’s contentions regarding the
gender-based social group she raises in her opening brief because she did not raise
them to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
With respect to Bolanos-Salinas’s informant-based social group, in denying
her asylum and withholding of removal claims, the agency found Bolanos-Salinas
failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of a
protected ground. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case, they did
not have the benefit of this court’s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707
F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir.
2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2014), or the BIA’s
decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of
W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014).1 Thus, we remand Bolanos-Salinas’s
asylum and withholding of removal claims to determine the impact, if any, of these
decisions on her informant-based social group claims. See INS v. Ventura, 537
U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam). In light of this remand, we do not reach
Bolanos-Salinas’s requests for a remand regarding the record or her remaining
1
We reject the government’s argument that this basis has been waived.
2 11-70011
challenges to the agency’s denial of her asylum and withholding of removal claims
at this time.
Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
3 11-70011