Guzman Rodriguez v. Garland
20-60907
| 5th Cir. | Jun 28, 2021Background
- Petitioner Karen Patricia Guzman Rodriguez, a Honduran national, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
- She based her asylum and withholding claims on membership in the proposed particular social group "business women from Honduras."
- The Immigration Judge denied relief; the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed her appeal.
- Guzman Rodriguez did not challenge the denial of claims based on political opinion or the Convention Against Torture, and those claims were treated as abandoned.
- The BIA concluded the proposed group was not a cognizable particular social group because it lacked immutability, particularity, and social visibility.
- The Fifth Circuit, applying substantial-evidence review to the BIA’s factual findings, denied the petition for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the proposed particular social group "business women from Honduras" is cognizable | Guzman Rodriguez: the group is a discrete class persecuted for being businesswomen | Respondent: the group lacks immutability, particularity, and social visibility required for a cognizable PSG | Denied — substantial evidence supports BIA that the group fails immutability, particularity, and social visibility requirements |
| Whether petitioner is entitled to asylum | Guzman Rodriguez: she has a well-founded fear of persecution as a member of the proposed group | Respondent: because the group is not cognizable, she cannot show persecution on account of a protected ground | Denied — failure to show a cognizable PSG defeats asylum eligibility |
| Whether petitioner is entitled to withholding of removal | Guzman Rodriguez: same factual basis as asylum justifies withholding | Respondent: withholding fails for same reasons as asylum | Denied — because asylum claim fails, withholding relief also fails under controlling precedent |
| Whether non-challenged claims (political opinion, CAT) survive | Guzman Rodriguez did not press these claims on appeal | Respondent: these claims are abandoned | Court: claims abandoned and not considered |
Key Cases Cited
- Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830 (5th Cir. 2003) (failure to brief an issue constitutes abandonment)
- Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588 (5th Cir. 2007) (standard of review for BIA decisions)
- Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531 (5th Cir. 2009) (substantial-evidence review of factual findings)
- Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131 (5th Cir. 2006) (eligibility for asylum/withholding is a factual finding)
- Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511 (5th Cir. 2012) (requirements for particular social group cognizability)
- Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899 (5th Cir. 2002) (failure to establish asylum entitlement forecloses withholding relief)