Mendoza-Mira v. Garland, 18-3736

Petitioner Sonia Mendoza-Mira, a Salvadoran native and member/employee of Partido De La Esperanza, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection based on political opinion.
She reported repeated threats by members of rival party ARENA from March–October 2013 and two physical incidents: (1) June 2013 — threatened at gunpoint and beaten for ~15 minutes (bruises/back pain, no medical treatment); (2) Oct. 11, 2013 — ARENA members knocked a pot of hot paraffin onto her foot at a flower shop, then fled; threatening calls continued thereafter.
The Immigration Judge denied relief; the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed in part on Nov. 21, 2018, concluding the harm she suffered did not rise to persecution.
Mendoza-Mira challenged the BIA’s decision to the Second Circuit, arguing the events amounted to past persecution and that there was a nexus to her political opinion.
The Second Circuit reviewed factual findings for substantial evidence and denied the petition for review, holding the BIA’s finding that the harm did not constitute persecution was supported by substantial evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Mendoza-Mira suffered past persecution based on political opinion	The threats, the June beating at gunpoint, and the paraffin burn plus ongoing calls cumulatively constituted persecution	The incidents were harassment/non-life-threatening, occurred outside custodial detention, caused no lasting injury, and thus did not rise to persecution	The BIA’s finding that the conduct did not amount to persecution was supported by substantial evidence; petition denied
Whether there was a nexus between the harm and petitioner’s political opinion	ARENA targeted Mendoza-Mira because of her membership and employment with Partido De La Esperanza	The record did not establish an adequate nexus (as argued below)	Not adequately before the court: the BIA did not base its decision on lack of nexus and the persecution finding was dispositive; court did not reach nexus issue

Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Department of Justice, 426 F.3d 520 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing BIA’s adoption/modification of IJ decision)
Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510 (2d Cir. 2009) (review standards for law and fact in immigration cases)
Ivanishvili v. U.S. Department of Justice, 433 F.3d 332 (2d Cir. 2006) (definition and degree-differentiation of persecution vs. harassment)
Beskovic v. Gonzales, 467 F.3d 223 (2d Cir. 2006) (physical abuse in detention or by uncontrolled actors may rise to persecution)
Tian-Yong Chen v. INS, 359 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2004) (non-life-threatening violence can be persecution if severe enough)
Jian Qiu Liu v. Holder, 632 F.3d 820 (2d Cir. 2011) (physical harm that is not serious or lasting may not constitute persecution)
Manzur v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 494 F.3d 281 (2d Cir. 2007) (must assess cumulative significance of adverse events)