2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-18-2008 

# J e re z S anche z v

. Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-3499

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " J e r ez S anchez v

. Atty Ge n U SA" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 824. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/824NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

________________ N o. 07- 3499

________________ AD ELA J EREZ- SAN CH EZ, GELB ER J EREZ, KI M BERLY J EREZ, P eti ti o n ers v. A TTO RN EY G EN ER A L O F TH E U N I TED STA TES, R es pondent

_____________________ O n Pet i t i on forR evi ew of an O r derof the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp eal s ( B I A N os . A 72- 776- 896, A 70- 868- 160, A 70- 868- 161) ( U . S . I m m i g r a t i o n J u d g e : H o n o r a b l e R o s a l i n d K . M a l l o y)

_______________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J ul y16, 2008 B efore: S C IR IC A , C hief J ud ge, C H A G A R E S and A L D ISE R T , C i rcui tJudg es. ( Fi l ed J ul y18, 2008 )

___________________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

___________________ P E R C U R I A M. A del a J er ez- Sanchez and hertw o chi l dr en, G el berJ er ez a nd K i m ber l yJ er ez, p eti ti o n fo r rev iew o f a fin al ord er o f th e B o ard o f Im m igrati o n A p p ea ls ( “B IA ”),T he chi l dr en’ s appl i cat i ons ar e der i vat i ve of J er ez- Sanchez ’ s as y l um appl i cat i on. 1 2 aff i r m i ng the deni al bythe I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “I J ”) of thei rappl i cat i on foras y l um and w i thhol di ng of r emoval . B efor e the I J , J er ez- Sanchez t es t i fi ed thats he fe ar ed r eturni ng 1 t o G uat emal a bec aus e of he rpas texper i ence s w i th guer i l l as . T he I J , fi ndi ng thatJ er ezSanchez ’ s exper i ence s di d notcons t i tut e per s ecut i on, deni ed herappl i cat i on. J er ezS a n c h e z a p p e a led th e d e c isio n to th e B IA , w h ich re m a n d e d th e c a se so th a t sh e c o u ld pr es entevi dence of curr entcondi t i ons i n G uat emal a. O n r emand, the I J , adopt ed the r eas oni ng of the pr evi ous I m m i gr at i on J udge, deni ed the appl i cat i on, and gr ant ed Pet i t i oner s vol unt arydepartur e i n l i eu of r emoval t o G uat emal a. J er ez- Sanchez appea l ed a n d th e B IA a f

f ir m e d th e d e c is io n o f

th e IJ . W e h av e jurisdicti o n p u rsua n t t o 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 5 2 (a). W e u p h o ld the B IA ’s det erm i nat i ons i f theyar e s uppor t ed byr eas onabl e, s ubs t ant i al and pr obat i ve evi dence on the re co rd c o n side red as a w h o le. Y u su p o v v . A tt ’yG en . , 5 1 8 F . 3 d 1 8 5 , 1 9 7 (3d C ir . 2008) . W her e the B I A s ubs t ant i al l yadopt s the fi ndi ngs of the I J , w e r evi ew the dec i s i ons o f b o th the IJ an d the B IA . H e C h u n C h en v . A sh cro ft, 3 7 6 F . 3 d 2 1 5 , 2 2 2 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). T o e sta b lish e lig ib ili tyf o r a sy lu m , Je re z -S a n c h e z m u st s h o w a re a so n a b le l i kel i hood thats he expe r i ence d pas tper s ecut i on orthats he has a w el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on “on ac countof r ace , r el i gi on, nat i onal i ty , m ember s hi p i n a part i cul ar s o c i a l g r o u p , o rp o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n . ” 8 U. S . C. § 1 1 5 8 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A) ( r e f e rr i n g t o 8 U. S . C. § 1 1 0 1 (a )(4 2 )(A )); C h u k w u v . A tt’yG e n ., 4 8 4 F .3 d 1 8 5 , 1 8 8 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 7 ). T o o b tainB eca us e w e w r i t e s ol el yforthe part i es w ho ar e fa m i l i arw i th the fa ct s , w e w i l l not 2 re c o u n t ea c h in c id e n t in d e tail. T h e in c id e n ts, h o w e v e r, w e re v io len t an d o f ten e n d e d in th e d e a th o f

J e re z -S a n c h e z ’s f

a m ily o r f

ri e n d s . 3 w i thhol di ng of r emoval , s he mustdemonstr at e a c l earpr obabi l i tythatherl i fe orfr eedom w o u l d b e th r e a t e n e d i n G u a t e m a l a o n a c c o u n to f h e rr a c e , r e l i g i o n , n a t i o n a l i ty, m em b ersh ip in a p arti cu lar soc ial g rou p , o r po li ti ca l op inion . 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 3 1 (b)(3 )(A ); R o m an ishyn v . A tt ’yG en . , 4 5 5 F . 3 d 1 7 5 , 1 7 8 n . 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 6 ). J er ez- Sanchez ’ s cl ai m of pas tper s ecut i on r es t ed on var i ous encount er s her h u sb a n d , fa m ilym e m b e rs, n e ig h b o rs a n d f rie n d s h a d w ith g u e rilla f o rc e s f ro m 1 9 8 0 to 1991. J er ez- Sanchez t es t i fi ed thatguer i l l as thr eat ened he rfi ancé , br other - i n- l aw and

2 father . She bel i eves herfami l yw as t ar get ed byguer i l l as beca us e theyi nform ed the g o v e rn m e n t o f

th e g u e ri lla s ’ w h e re a b o u ts a n d w e re m e m b e rs o f th e C iv ilia n P a tr o l. Fi nal l y , J er ez- Sanchez t es t i fi ed that , s i nce s he l eftG uat emal a, hertw o s i s t er s w er e r aped i n h er hom e t ow n an d a fri end of the fam i l yw as ki l l ed b ygu eri l l as w hil e w orki ng as a s e c u ri ty g u a rd a t a b a n k . W h ile J e re z -S a n c h e z ’s e x p e rie n c e s in G u a tem a la a re tra g ic, th e yd o n o t co n stitu te pas tper s ecut i on underI m m i gr at i on and N at i onal i tyA ct . See K onan v. A t t ’ yG en. , 432 F. 3d 497, 506 ( 3d C i r . 2005) ( gener al condi t i ons of ci vi l unr es torchr oni c vi ol ence and law lessn ess d o n o t sup p o rtasy lum ). Jere z-S an ch ez fa il ed to testi fyto an yp erso n al ha rm s he s uffe r ed atthe hands of guer i l l as . See C ham v. A t t ’ yG en. , 445 F. 3d 683, 693 ( 3d C ir. 2 0 0 6 ) (a n a p p lica n t ca n n o t re lyso lelyo n th e p e rse c u tio n o f h e r f a m ilym e m b e rs toB eca us e J er ez- Sanchez fai l ed t o m ake outan as y l um cl ai m , s he nec es s ar i l yfai l ed 3 t o s at i s fythe more s tr i ngents t andar d forw i thhol di ng of r emoval . See Lukw ago v. A s h c ro f t, 3 2 9 F .3 d 1 5 7 , 1 8 2 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). 4 qual i fyforas y l um ) . Fur ther , the thr eat s m ade byguer i l l as w er e notper s onal l ydi r ect ed at h e r, n o r c a n th e yb e d e sc rib e d a s “ h ig h lyim m in e n t, co n c re te a n d m e n a c in g .” C h a v a rria v . G o n z a les , 4 4 6 F .3 d 5 0 8 , 5 2 0 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 6 ). B e c a u se Je re z -S a n c h e z f a iled to demonstr at e pas tper s ecut i on s he w as notel i gi bl e fordi s cr et i onarygr antof as y l um for h u m a n ita ri a n re a s o n s . S e e A l- F a ra v . G o n z a le s , 4 0 4 F .3 d 7 3 3 , 7 4 0 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). J er ez- Sanchez al s o fai l ed t o pr ove a w el l - founded f earof futur e per s ecut i on. See G om ez- Z ul uaga v. A t t ’ yG en. , 527 F. 3d 330, 345 ( 3d C i r . 2008) . J er ez- Sanchez pr es ent ed onl yhers ubj ect i ve bel i ef thatguer i l l as w er e s t i l l act i ve i n G uat emal a. See K i bi nda v. A t t ’ yG en. , 477 F. 3d 113, 120 ( 3d C i r . 2007) ( w el l founded f earof per s ecut i on m us tbe s uppor t ed byobj ect i ve evi dence ) . She di d notpr es entanyt angi bl e evi dence t hat herfami l yi s bei ng t ar get ed bec aus e theyw er e governm enti nform ant s . M or eover , the U . S. St at e D epart m entC ountr yR eporton G uat emal a i ndi cat es thatther e w er e no s ubs t ant i at ed r eport s of pol i t i cal l ym ot i vat ed ki l l i ngs i n 2004. W e fi nd no m er i ti n J er ez- Sanchez ’ s cont ent i on thats he di d notr ece i ve an i ndi vi dual i zed de t erm i nat i on fr om the B I A . See A bdul ai v. A s hcr oft , 239 F. 3d 542, 549 (3 d C ir. 2 0 0 1 ). T h e B IA o p in io n sp e c if ica llyid e n tifie s a n d re

jec ts a rg u m e n ts s h e m a d e in fr ontof the I J . I d. at550. 3 F o rth e a b o v e - s t a t e d r e a s o n s , we wi l l d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w.