Guaman-Loja v. Holder, 707 F.3d 119

Guaman-Loja is an Ecuadorian indigenous woman whose primary language is Quechua.
She engaged in literacy-driven community activities for indigenous people in Ecuador in the 1980s.
She and her family received threats and some family members were assaulted due to her activities.
She left Ecuador and entered the United States illegally around April 10, 2003.
She applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief in May 2006; the IJ denied relief and the BIA dismissed the appeal.
The BIA affirmed the IJ's conclusions, including that the harms did not amount to persecution and there was no government involvement or inability of the government to control private actors.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Guaman-Loja showed past persecution	Guaman-Loja argues threats and assaults amount to persecution	BIA found harms not severe or systemic enough for persecution	Yes, not persecution; harms did not rise to persecution under test
Whether fear of future persecution is established without past persecution	Past persecution not required if future risk shown	No substantial future persecution shown	No, no substantial future persecution shown
Whether state involvement is required for refugee status	Persecution can be governmental or government-caused	Harm by private actors not linked to government cannot establish refugee status	No error; no government connection shown
Timeliness and consideration of evidence	Changed circumstances/extraordinary circumstances could excuse delay	One-year bar applied; delay not excused	Court did not need to decide significance of potential error on timeliness

Barsoum v. Holder, 617 F.3d 73 (1st Cir. 2010) (severity and persistence of harm relevant to persecution)
Lopez de Hincapie v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 213 (1st Cir. 2007) (beyond ordinary harassment required for persecution)
Anacassus v. Holder, 602 F.3d 14 (1st Cir. 2010) (presumption of future persecution requires past persecution or equivalent evidence)
Castillo-Diaz v. Holder, 562 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 2009) (state must be implicated via action or acquiescence for persecution to be found)
Makhoul v. Ashcroft, 387 F.3d 75 (1st Cir. 2004) (psychological harm can support past persecution in certain circumstances)
Morgan v. Holder, 634 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2011) (credibility determinations unnecessary when testimony insufficient for relief)
Vanchurina v. Holder, 619 F.3d 95 (1st Cir. 2010) (past persecution creates presumption of future persecution; lacking, need specific proof)
Soeung v. Holder, 677 F.3d 484 (1st Cir. 2012) (definition of refugee requires well-founded fear and persecution on listed grounds)
Nikijuluw v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2005) (government involvement or unwillingness to protect is required for persecution)