Wildon Cordova v. Eric Holder, Jr.
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 13759
| 4th Cir. | 2014Background
- Aquino, a Salvadoran national, entered the U.S. without inspection in July 2010 and received a notice to appear charging unlawful presence.
- He sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture; the IJ denied all relief and the BIA affirmed.
- Aquino testified that MS-13 attacked him in 2008 and 2009, and that Mara 18 violence followed his association with Vidal, a Mara 18 member.
- A May 2010 incident involved MS-13 threats to kill Aquino and his cousin Vidal; six weeks later Vidal was murdered.
- Aquino argued a cognizable social group based on kinship to gang members; he submitted corroborating and human rights materials.
- The BIA dismissed on two grounds: no cognizable social group and no nexus to persecution; Aquino petitions for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nexus between proposed social group and persecution | Aquino's kinship to Vidal/Uncle tied to threats by MS-13; nexus exists. | BIA found no central reason linking family to protected ground; threats based on gang dynamics, not kinship. | Remand for nexus analysis; insufficient basis to affirm. |
| Cognizability of family-based social group under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) | Family ties can define a particular social group; prior caselaw supports kinship-based groups. | BIA rejected family-based group as not cognizable and failed to analyze the proposed group properly. | Remand to address proper cognizability analysis. |
| Adequacy of BIA's reasoning on nexus | BIA's nexus analysis does not bridge record to legal conclusion; should consider full context and testimony. | BIA reasonably weighed credibility and evidence; any gaps do not mandate invalidating the decision. | Remand for explanation consistent with this opinion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez v. Holder, 740 F.3d 902 (4th Cir.2014) (defines social group criteria for asylum nexus)
- Crespin-Valladares v. Holder, 632 F.3d 117 (4th Cir.2011) (limits on nexus and emphasizes central reasons for persecution)
- Lizama v. Holder, 629 F.3d 440 (4th Cir.2011) (reiterates social group delineation requirements)
- Ai Hua Chen v. Holder, 742 F.3d 171 (4th Cir.2014) (review of BIA/IJ decisions on asylum with de novo legal questions)
- Nken v. Holder, 585 F.3d 822 (4th Cir.2009) (remand and Chenery framework for agency decisions)
- Chenery I, 318 U.S. 80 (1943) (agency grounds must be clearly disclosed and sustained)
- Chenery II, 332 U.S. 194 (1947) (court may not affirm on an unspecified basis)
- Tassi v. Holder, 660 F.3d 710 (4th Cir.2011) (agency must provide rational basis for decision)
- Baharon v. Holder, 588 F.3d 228 (4th Cir.2009) (duty to avoid improper reweighing of evidence on review)
- Mengistu v. Ashcroft, 355 F.3d 1044 (7th Cir.2004) (requires proper bridge between record and legal conclusions)