Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-19-12727/USCOURTS-ca11-19-12727-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Deninson Jordany Baca-Guevara
Petitioner
Lesly Patrosinia Guevara-Torres
Petitioner
U.S. Attorney General
Respondent
Jordy Alejandro Velasquez-Guevara
Petitioner

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 19-12727

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

Agency No. A205-634-432

LESLY PATROSINIA GUEVARA-TORRES, 

a.k.a. Lelsy Maribel Guevara-Arias, 

a.k.a. Lelsy Guevara-Torres, 

a.k.a. Elsy Maribel Guevara-Arias, 

JORDY ALEJANDRO VELASQUEZ-GUEVARA, 

DENINSON JORDANY BACA-GUEVARA, 

 Petitioners,

 versus

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

 Respondent.

________________________

Petition for Review of a Decision of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

________________________

(February 12, 2020)

USCA11 Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 1 of 3
2

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, GRANT and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Lesly Guevara-Torres and her two children petition for review of the order 

of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the denial of her applications for 

asylum and withholding of removal. Guevara-Torres argues that the Board erred in 

concluding that her particular social group—Honduran women exposed to genderbased violence because of the male-dominated society—was not cognizable under 

the Immigration and Nationality Act, and she argues that she suffered past 

persecution and has a well-founded fear of future persecution. We dismiss in part 

and deny in part her petition for review.

If a petitioner fails to exhaust her administrative remedies for a claim for 

relief, we lack jurisdiction to consider the claim even when the Board addresses it 

sua sponte. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Amaya-Artunduaga v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 463 F.3d 

1247, 1250–51 (11th Cir. 2006). 

The Board did not err in concluding that Guevara-Torres failed to establish 

her status as a refugee under the Act by membership in a “particular social group.” 

In Castillo-Arias v. U.S. Attorney General, we deferred to the administrative

criteria for establishing a cognizable social group, including that the members of 

the group share a common characteristic that is immutable or fundamental to their

individual identities or consciences. 446 F.3d 1190, 1196–97 (11th Cir. 2006). And 

USCA11 Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 2 of 3
3

we explained that a social group should not be defined so broadly that it becomes 

“a catch all for all groups who might claim persecution.” See id. at 1196–98. A 

particular social group cannot be defined by the underlying harm asserted as 

persecution. Amezcua-Preciado v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 943 F.3d 1337, 1345 (11th Cir. 

2019). The Board correctly concluded that Guevara-Torres’s alleged social group 

lacked particularity, is not socially distinct, and is defined by the risk of harm 

asserted by her as persecution. As a result, we deny her petition in part. And

because Guevara-Torres failed to exhaust her arguments about suffering past 

persecution or having a well-founded fear of future persecution, we lack 

jurisdiction to consider them and dismiss her petition in part.

PETITION DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART.

USCA11 Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 3 of 3