Moreno v. Holder
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 7364
| 1st Cir. | 2014Background
- Luz Mery Moreno, a Colombian national, entered the U.S. on a tourist visa in 1998 and overstayed; removal proceedings began nearly eight years later.
- Moreno conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection (asylum application filed in 2007).
- She testified she fled Colombia because her first husband was involved in narcotics, he threatened her, and he was later murdered (she suspected drug-related motives); she offered little documentary corroboration.
- The IJ found her testimony credible but denied asylum, concluding she failed to prove past persecution or a well‑founded fear of future persecution tied to a protected ground; the IJ also applied the REAL ID Act corroboration requirement.
- The BIA affirmed; Moreno appealed to the First Circuit, challenging (1) application of REAL ID corroboration rules, (2) the finding on past/future persecution, and (3) the BIA’s rejection of her proposed particular social group (widows of slain narco‑traffickers).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether REAL ID Act corroboration rules apply | Moreno: her 2007 asylum claim was derivative of a 1992 application (via her second husband), so REAL ID should not apply | DOJ: Moreno’s asylum application was filed in 2007, so REAL ID applies | REAL ID corroboration requirement applies to Moreno’s 2007 asylum application |
| Whether Moreno established past persecution | Moreno: threats and husband’s murder linked to narco associates show past persecution | DOJ: testimony lacked corroboration and causal link to Moreno; threats alone insufficient | Substantial evidence supports agency finding she failed to prove past persecution |
| Whether Moreno showed well‑founded fear of future persecution | Moreno: past events and ongoing threats establish future fear | DOJ: no past persecution proven, so no rebuttable presumption; insufficient independent evidence of future risk | Court upheld denial of well‑founded fear claim (fails without past persecution or other proof) |
| Whether proposed social group is cognizable | Moreno: widows of slain narco‑traffickers constitute a particular social group | DOJ: argued claim fails on the merits and was not established before the BIA | Court found social‑group issue moot given rejection of persecution/fear claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Gilca v. Holder, 680 F.3d 109 (1st Cir.) (substantial‑evidence review of credibility and facts)
- INS v. Elias‑Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (agency factual findings entitled to deference)
- Ang v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 50 (1st Cir.) (hollow threats alone do not establish persecution)
- Muñoz‑Monsalve v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 1 (1st Cir.) (REAL ID corroboration and burden on applicant)
- Lopez Perez v. Holder, 587 F.3d 456 (1st Cir.) (rebuttable presumption from past persecution and requirements for asylum eligibility)