Diaz Ruano v. Holder, 420 F. App'x 19

Petitioner, a Guatemalan national, fled Guatemala in 2003 due to gang violence after a friend was targeted by a gang.
He reported the initial confrontation to police, who claimed insufficient evidence to pursue the matter.
Petitioner entered the United States in 2003, later appeared in removal proceedings in 2006, and applied for withholding of removal and CAT protection.
An IJ denied both forms of relief; BIA affirmed on de novo review; petitioner did not seek asylum due to the one-year filing deadline.
The court reviews factual findings for substantial evidence and legal questions de novo; the group claim and CAT claim are central to denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the claimed social group is cognizable for withholding of removal	Diaz-Ruano contends the group 'young males sought out for information and recruitment' is cognizable.	Government argues the group is not sufficiently particular or socially visible to qualify.	Group not cognizable; not sufficiently particular or socially visible.
Whether there was government acquiescence to gang violence	Diaz-Ruano argues police acquiesced by failing to act after reporting the incident.	Police conduct could reflect lack of evidence rather than condonation or inability to act.	Evidence supports no compelled finding of governmental acquiescence.
Whether the CAT claim was properly considered	Diaz-Ruano contends CAT protection should have been considered.	CAT claim abandoned due to lack of developed argument.	CAT claim deemed abandoned; no reversible error found.

INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (substantial evidence review for factual findings; de novo for law)
López-Pérez v. Holder, 587 F.3d 456 (1st Cir. 2009) (requires showing prospect of serious harm; connection to govt)
López de Hincapie v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 213 (1st Cir. 2007) (standard for withholding of removal must show threat and govt connection)
Matter of E-A-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 591 (BIA 2008) (cognizable social group requires immutable, particular, socially visible traits)
Matter of S-E-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 579 (BIA 2008) (cognizable social group must be definable and recognizable in community)
Matter of Acosta, 19 I. & N. Dec. 211 (BIA 1985) (early articulation of social group concept)
Jorgji v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2008) (governmental involvement/acquiescence standard in withholding)
Orelien v. Gonzales, 467 F.3d 67 (1st Cir. 2006) (requires link between harm and government action or acquiescence)
Wiratama v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008) (CAT nexus considerations and government involvement standards)
Chhay v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008) (CAT standard and governmental nexus guidance)
Faye v. Holder, 580 F.3d 37 (1st Cir. 2009) (social group criteria; decisional alignment with cognizable groups)
Morgan v. Holder, 634 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2011) (reaffirmation of substantial evidence review in immigration appeals)