Vega-Ayala v. Lynch, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 14717

Yesenia Vega-Ayala, a Salvadoran national, entered the U.S. without inspection in 2010 and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
She testified she was raped by a former partner, Juan Hernandez, became pregnant, suffered threats and physical abuse, and feared return because Hernandez had threatened her and family.
She defined her proposed particular social group as “Salvadoran women in intimate relationships with partners who view them as property.”
The IJ denied relief, finding Vega-Ayala’s proposed group lacked immutability and social distinction, that abuse was motivated by financial reasons rather than a protected ground, and that she failed to show government inability or unwillingness to protect her.
The BIA affirmed the IJ, adopting the same reasons and dismissing her appeal. Vega-Ayala petitioned for review to the First Circuit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the proposed group is immutable	Vega-Ayala: being in an intimate relationship with a partner who views you as property is an immutable characteristic or effectively unchangeable	Government: the characteristic is not immutable; she could leave the relationship	Court: Not immutable; facts show she could have left (never cohabited, attended university, relationship short, partner incarcerated)
Whether the proposed group has social distinction	Vega-Ayala: Salvadoran society recognizes and treats such women as a distinct group due to pervasive domestic violence	Government: no evidence society treats them as a distinct, identifiable group	Court: No social distinction shown; general evidence of domestic violence insufficient
Whether harm was "on account of" membership in a protected group	Vega-Ayala: abuse and threats were because she was a woman in such a relationship	Government: threats were motivated by money/other non-protected reasons	Court: Held government was correct; threats were principally financial, not tied to protected ground
Whether Salvadoran government was unable/unwilling to protect her	Vega-Ayala: police and authorities do not reliably protect domestic-violence victims	Government: Vega-Ayala never reported abuse; abuser was prosecuted/incarcerated for other crimes	Court: Agency reasonably found she failed to show government inability or unwillingness to protect; no reporting and incarceration evidence undermined her claim

INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (establishes substantial-evidence review and requirement to link persecution to protected ground)
Lopez de Hincapie v. Gonzales, 494 F.3d 213 (financially motivated harm is not on account of a protected ground)
Nikijuluw v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 115 (standard for substantial-evidence review of BIA factual findings)
Villa-Londono v. Holder, 600 F.3d 21 (burden on asylum applicant to prove refugee status)
Paiz-Morales v. Lynch, 795 F.3d 238 (particular-social-group elements: immutability, particularity, social distinction)
Mayorga-Vidal v. Holder, 675 F.3d 9 (definition of immutability in social-group analysis)
Granada-Rubio v. Lynch, 814 F.3d 35 (explanation of social-distinction requirement)
Orelien v. Gonzales, 467 F.3d 67 (withholding of removal standard follows asylum findings)