Gerardo Castro-Chavez v. Jefferson Sessions
699 F. App'x 766
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Gerardo Castro-Chavez, a Mexican national, seeks review of the BIA’s dismissal of his appeal from an IJ’s denial of withholding of removal and CAT relief.
- The BIA and IJ denied relief after finding his asylum application untimely; Castro-Chavez did not challenge that finding on appeal here.
- The agency concluded he failed to show persecution on account of membership in a particular social group; his new social-group theory was not raised before the agency.
- The agency also found he failed to show it was more likely than not he would be tortured by the Mexican government or with its consent/acquiescence.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed legal questions de novo and factual findings for substantial evidence, denied in part and dismissed in part the petition for review, and denied Castro-Chavez’s motions to remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner qualifies for withholding based on membership in a particular social group | Castro-Chavez argued he faces harm tied to a protected social group | Government argued petitioner failed to show nexus between feared harm and a protected ground; new group theory unexhausted | Denied: substantial evidence showed no nexus; unexhausted new social-group claim not considered |
| Whether CAT relief required finding government torture or government acquiescence/consent | Castro-Chavez argued he would likely be tortured if returned | Government argued record lacks proof government would commit or permit torture | Denied: substantial evidence supports agency’s conclusion petitioner did not meet CAT standard |
| Whether asylum claim is reviewable on the merits | Castro-Chavez challenged denial of relief generally | Government relied on agency finding asylum application was time-barred | Dismissed as to asylum: petitioner did not challenge the time-bar decision and thus waived the issue |
| Whether court should remand for further administrative consideration (including cancellation) | Castro-Chavez asked for remand to the BIA for further relief consideration | Government opposed remand; record limited to administrative proceedings | Motion to remand denied; request to remand for cancellation also denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2008) (standard of review for immigration law questions)
- Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532 (9th Cir. 2004) (deference owed to BIA statutory/regulatory interpretations)
- Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2008) (substantial-evidence review of CAT and withholding findings)
- Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not raised in opening brief are waived)
- Ramirez-Munoz v. Lynch, 816 F.3d 1226 (9th Cir. 2016) (nexus requirement for particular social group claims)
- Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2010) (criminal harassment/theft-driven violence lacks nexus to protected ground)
- Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674 (9th Cir. 2004) (exhaustion requirement for administrative issues)
- Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 1996) (review limited to the administrative record)