# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

____________ No. 22

- 60439 Summary Calendar

____________ Alba Aracely Amaya

- Hernandez; Jefferson Josael Luna

Amaya, Petitioners ,
versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General , Respondent

.

______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency Nos. A208 752 921, A208 752 922

______________________________ Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam : * Alba Aracely Amaya

- Hernandez and her minor son, both natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial by the immigration judge of her application for asyl um, withholding of removal, and

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir

. R

. 47.5. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 19, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-60439 Document: 00516756630 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/19/2023No. 22

- 60439

2 relief under the Convention against Torture (CAT). 1 We review denials of asylum, withholding, and CAT claims for substantial evidence. Chen
v. Gonzales , 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006) . Under this standard, we may
no t disturb the BIA’s decision unless the evidence “compels” a contrary conclusion. Orellana

- Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 517 (5th Cir. 2012). We consider the IJ’s decision only insofar as it influences the BIA. Id. Amaya

- Hernandez points to no record evidence undermining the agency’s conclusion that her assailants’ motive was to obtain information regarding murder of a state prosecutor and they thus targeted Amaya

Hernandez only as a means to that end, unrelated to h er family membership. The evidence thus does not compel a conclusion contrary to the agency’s determination that her nuclear family membership was not “one central reason” for the incident. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i); see Va z quez - Guerra v. Garland , 7 F.4th 265, 271 (5th Cir. 2021) , cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 1228 (2022) ; Orellana

Monson , 685 F.3d at 518. A nexus between the harm and a protected ground is an essential element of asylum and withholding claim s . See Va z quez Guerra , 7 F.4th at 269. We therefore do no t consider Amaya

- Hernandez’s contentions that the attack on her constituted persecution , that her assailants were police officers, that her particular social group is cognizable, and that she faces future persecution

. S ee INS v. Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976)

. We likewise do no t consider Amaya

- Hernandez’s assertion that , as to withholding, the BIA erred by failing to shift the burden to the Government to show “a fundamental change in circumstances in El Salvador or that relocation would be reasonable.” See Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. at 25
. B ecause Amaya

- Hernandez failed to establish eligibility for asylum, she necessarily

_____________________ 1 Because Amaya

- Hernandez’s minor son is a rider on and derivative beneficiary of his mother’s application for relief, we refer herein only to Amaya

- Hernandez. Case: 22-60439 Document: 00516756630 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/19/2023No. 22

- 60439

3 also cannot meet the requirements for withholding of removal. See Jaco v. Garland , 24 F.4th 395, 401 (5th Cir. 2021); Orellana

- Monson , 685 F.3d at 518. As to CAT relief, Amaya

- Hernandez ’s conclusory and unsupported assertions fail to compel a conclusion contrary to that of the BIA on the question whether s he more likely than not will be tortured with governmental acquiescence if repatriated. See Martinez Manzanares v. Barr , 925 F.3d 222, 228 (5th Cir. 201 9 )

. Because Amaya

- Hernand ez failed to show the requisite state acquiescence or involvement, the BIA did not need to address the likelihood of harm rising to the level of torture. See Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. at 25. The petition for review is DENIED

. Case: 22-60439 Document: 00516756630 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/19/2023