Avelar Gonzalez v. Whitaker, 908 F.3d 820

Francisco Avelar-Gonzalez, a Salvadoran national, entered the U.S. in January 2012 and applied for asylum (initial application Dec. 2012; updated application Jan. 2017) claiming persecution based on membership in the ARENA political party.
His 2017 affidavit described three alleged incidents in 2008–2009 (assault, shooting at campaigners, knife threat) and unspecified later threats; he remained in El Salvador until 2012 but the affidavit omitted events after early 2009.
A January 30, 2012 sworn Border Patrol statement signed by Avelar-Gonzalez said he came to the U.S. to live and work and expressed no fear of return, a discrepancy the IJ highlighted at the merits hearing.
The IJ found inconsistencies and vagueness in his testimony and affidavit and concluded corroborating evidence (police reports, medical records, notes, family statements) appeared reasonably available but was not provided.
Two letters were submitted: one from an ARENA representative confirming party membership but not attacks, and one notarized letter describing 2011 gang attacks (by MS/18), which conflicted with the applicant’s timeline; the IJ and BIA found these insufficient.
The IJ denied asylum, withholding, and CAT relief; the BIA affirmed the denial based principally on inadequate corroboration. The First Circuit denied review of the corroboration ruling and dismissed other claims for lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Adequacy of corroboration for asylum claim	Avelar-Gonzalez contends he met his burden with affidavit, testimony, and two letters	Government argues key facts were inconsistent/vague and corroboration (police, medical, family) was reasonably available but absent	Court: Upheld BIA/IJ — substantial evidence supports that corroboration was reasonably available and insufficiently provided
Withholding of removal	Same evidence suffices for withholding	Withholding has higher standard and depends on same uncorroborated evidence	Denied — asylum failure dooms withholding claim
Past-persecution claim presented to BIA	Avelar-Gonzalez asserts past persecution	Government: he did not present/brief this theory to the BIA	Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (failure to exhaust administrative remedies)
CAT (Convention Against Torture) claim	Applicant argues risk of torture on return	Government: CAT claim not adequately presented to BIA; also depends on uncorroborated facts	Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (failure to exhaust before BIA)

I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (standard for reviewing agency factual findings)
I.N.S. v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421 (well-founded fear standard for asylum)
Soeung v. Holder, 677 F.3d 484 (corroboration requirement increases as testimony weakens)
Balachandran v. Holder, 566 F.3d 269 (IJs may require corroboration without making an adverse credibility finding)
Bahta v. Lynch, 835 F.3d 65 (alien bears burden to substantiate facts underlying asylum claim)