Case ID: f-appx_566/html/0311-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Milton Rosario Chica SORTO, also known as Milton Sorto Rosario, Petitioner v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 13-60517
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    May 1, 2014.
    Jesus A. Macias, Houston, TX, for Petitioner.
    Melissa Katherine Lott, Trial Attorney, Tangerlia Cox, Jane Tracey Schaffner, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Milton Rosario Chica Sorto (Chica), a citizen and native of El Salvador, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the order of the immigration judge (IJ) denying his application for withholding of removal. Chica maintains that the IJ and BIA erred by denying his application for withholding of removal because his testimony and the evidence of conditions in El Salvador showed that there is a clear probability that, if he is removed to El Salvador, he will be persecuted by gangs on account of his membership in the particular social group of young men facing forcible gang recruitment. He argues that he does not have to show that he will be singled out individually for persecution but only that there is a pattern and practice in El Salvador of persecuting a group of persons similarly situated to him and that he is a member of that group.

Chica’s proposed social group of young Salvadoran men facing forced gang recruitment lacks the particularity and social visibility to constitute a particular social group under immigration law. See Orella-na-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 521-22 (5th Cir.2012). Accordingly, Chica was not entitled to withholding of removal because he did not show a likelihood of persecution based upon his membership in a particular social group. See id. at 522. Chica’s petition for review is DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.