[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 10 09 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Age nc y No. A0 79 -1 02 -0 57 AFERDITA FEJZA, et al.,

Pet it io ne rs ,

ve rs us
U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL,
Res po nd en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of a Deci si on of t he Bo ard of I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Sep te m be r 4, 2 01 2)
Befo re TJ OFLAT, JORDAN and KRAVITCH, Cir cu it Ju dg es
. PER CURI AM:
Aferd it a Fejza an d Sara Fejza, an Alb a n i a n m ot he r an d ch il d, pe ti ti on fo r

rev ie w of t he Bo ard of I m m ig rat io n Ap pe al s’ fin al ord er af fir m in g t he im m ig rat io n Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 1 of 10jud ge ’s de ni al of th ei r ap pl ic at io ns fo r as y lu m an d fo r wit hh ol di ng of rem ov al un de r

th e Im m ig rat io n an d Nati on al it y Act, 8 U.S.C. §§ 11 0 1 ( a ) ( 42 ), 11 58 (b )(1 ),
12 31 (b )(3 )(A). The BIA co nc lu de d th at Ms

. Fejza fai le d to m eet he r bu rd en of pr oo f 1
fo r as y lu m an d w i t h h ol di ng of rem ov al be cau se sh e fai le d to es ta bl is h he r

m em be rs hi p in a pa rti cu la r so ci al gr ou p, an d ev en if sh e d id , sh e fai le d to es ta bl is h

a ne xu s be twee n an y p e r s e c ut io n sh e m ay ha ve face d an d an y of th e en um erat ed

gr ou nd s in th e Act. Se e 8 U.S.C. § 11 01 (a)( 42 ) (“ well -fo un de d fear of pe rs ecu ti on on

acco un t of race , rel ig io n, na ti on al it y , m em be rs hi p in a pa rti cu la r so ci al g r o u p , or
po li ti cal op in io n” ). Fin di ng no rev ers ib le erro r, we de ny the pe ti ti on
. 2

I
On Ju ly 29 , 20 04 , th e go ve rn m en t se rv ed Ms

. Fejza wit h a n o t i c e to ap pe ar.
Ms

. Fe jz a , t hr ou gh co un se l, ad m it te d th e al le ga ti on s in th e NTA an d co nc ed ed he r

rem ov ab il it y on Apr il 20 , 20 05

. Afte r co nc ed in g he r rem ov ab il it y , Ms

. Fejza fil ed an
ap pl ic at io n fo r as y lu m , wit hh ol di ng of rem ov al , an d CAT rel ie f, whi ch sh e am en de d

The Fe jzas failed to make any arg ument befor e the BI A challeng ing the I J ’s denial of their 1 claim for w ithholding of re moval under the United Nations Convention Ag ainst Torture , 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16, so we lack jurisdiction to consider any such challeng e now. See Sundar v. INS , 328 F.3d 1320, 1323 (11th Cir. 2 0 0 3 ) (“ [ W ] e lack jurisdiction to consider claims that have not been raised befor e the BI A.”)

. The Fejzas also abandone d any arg ument reg arding their C AT claim by failing to arg ue it in their brief. See Lapaix v. U.S. Att’y Gen. , 605 F.3d 1138, 1145 (11th Ci r. 2 010) (“G ener all y , wh en an appellant fails to offe r arg ument on an issue, that issue is deeme d abandone d.”).
Be cause Afe rdita Fe

jza is the lead petitioner and her daug hter Sara, is a deriva tive asy lum 2 applicant in this case , we will re fer to Afer dita as Ms. Fe

jza.
2 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 2 of 10o n J u l y 3 1, 20 07

. In he r ap pl ic at io n, as am en de d, Ms

. Fejza in di cat ed th at sh e w a s

se ek in g rel ie f ba se d on he r rel ig io n, po li ti cal op in io n, an d m em be rs hi p in a pa rti cu la r

so ci al gro up
. Ms

. Fejza al le ge s th at whe n sh e was 15 y ears ol d he r fat he r arra ng ed fo r he r

to m arry Vesn ik Kada , a 30 -y ear o ld m an fro m a ne ig hb or in g v il la ge . Acco rd in g t o
Ms

. Fejza, sh e was ba dl y be at en by he r fat he r whe n sh e refu se d to m arry Mr. Kada.

Late r, whe n sh e was 17 , Ms

. Fej z a f le d to a ne ig hb or in g vi ll ag e an d m arri ed he r
bo y fri en d, Fi ti m Fejza. Afte r he r m arri ag e, Ms

. Fejza be ga n to rece iv e de at h th reat s
fro m Mr. K ad a an d hi s fam il y
. Ms

. Fejza al so rece iv ed th reat s fr om he r own fam il y

an d was di so wne d by he r pa ren ts

. Sh e was di so wne d be cau se if he r pa ren ts acce pt ed
he r m arri ag e th ey wou ld ha ve en te red in to a bl oo d f e u d w i t h t h e Kad a fam il y
. Ms

. Fejza al so te st ifi ed th at in Feb ru ary o f 19 99 Mr. Kad a at te m pt ed to ki ll he r an d he r
hu sb an d by fir in g se ve ral sh ot s at th e m whi le th ey were at a bu s st op
. Ms

. Fejza

co nt in ue d to rece iv e th reat s fro m Mr. Kad a an d hi s fam il y , an d in Mar ch of 20 01 sh e
fle d wi th he r da ug ht er t o t he Uni te d S ta te s. 3

Fo ll owi ng a he ari ng , th e I J d i d no t fin d Ms

. Fejza cred ib le , de ni ed he r
ap pl ic at io ns fo r rel ie f, an d or de red he r rem ov ed to Alb an ia

. On May 1, 20 08 , th e BIA

Ms. Fe jza’s husband, Mr. Fe

jz a, testified at Ms. Fe

jza’s hear ing that he had applied for 3 asy lum but that he was appe aling to the BI A bec ause his application had been de nied.
3 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 3 of 10affi rm ed th e IJ ’s ru li ng s. Ms

. Fejza fil ed a m ot io n to reo pe n wit h th e BIA on Apr il 29 ,

20 09

. The m ot io n to reo pe n was gr an te d on Octo be r 23 , 20 09 , an d th e BIA rem an de d

Ms

. Fejza’s cas e to th e IJ

. Afte r ho ld in g an ot he r he ari ng th e IJ on ce ag ai n fo un d Ms

. Fejza to no t be cred ib le

. The IJ al so fo un d th at Ms

. Fejza fai le d to sh ow a ne xu s
be twee n t he pu rp or te d h arm an d a pro te ct ed gro un d.

Ms

. Fejza ap pe al ed t o t h e BIA. The BIA di sm is se d Ms

. Fejza’s ap pe al on
Decem be r 9, 20 11

. The BIA det erm in ed th at , ev en if i t as su m ed th at Ms . Fejza was
cred ib le , sh e ha d fai le d to de m on st r a t e t h a t s he su ffer ed pa st pe rs ecu ti on or he ld a
well -fo un de d fear of fu tu re pe rs ecu ti on ba se d on a pr ot ect ed gr ou nd

. Sp eci fic al ly, th e
BIA det erm in ed th at Ms . Fejza’s p ro po se d s oc ia l g ro up of “ wom en in Alb an ia who
refu se th ei r fam il ie s’ arra ng ed mar r i a g e s” di d no t co ns ti tu te a “ pa rti cu la r so ci al

gr ou p.” Ms . Fejza n ow ap pe al s.
II
Bec au se th e BIA is su ed it s own op in io n an d di d no t ex pr es sl y ad op t th e IJ ’s

op in io n or reas on in g, we rev ie w on ly the BIA o pi ni on
. Se e Se ck v. U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 66 3 F.3 d 13 56 , 1 36 4 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 11 ) (“ W e rev ie w o n l y t h e B I A’ s de ci si on ex cep t

to th e ex te nt th e BIA ex pr es sl y ad op ts th e IJ ’s o pi ni on or reas on in g.” ). W e rev ie w

4

To the ex tent that Ms. Fe jza arg ues t hat the I J err ed, we consider the se ar g uments only if 4 the B I A adopted the ruling in question.
4

Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 4 of 10t h e B I A ’s de te rm in at io n th at an al ie n is no t el ig ib le fo r as y lu m or wit hh ol di ng o f

rem ov al un de r th e hi gh ly de fere nt ia l “ su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce” te st

. Se e Arb ol ed a v. U.S.
Att ’y Gen

. , 43 4 F .3d 12 20 , 12 22 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). “ ‘U nd er th e su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce

te st , we vi ew th e reco rd ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab le to th e ag en cy ’s de ci si on

an d dr aw al l reas on ab le in fere nc es in fav or of th at de ci si on .’ ” Ali v. U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 64 3 F.3d 13 24 , 13 29 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 11 ) (q uo ti ng Ade fe mi v. Ash cr of

t , 38 6 F.3d 10 22 , 10 27 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 04 ) ( en ba n c ) )

. We mu st affi rm th e BIA if it s de ci si on is

“ su p p o r te d by reas on ab le , su bs ta nt ia l, an d pr ob at iv e ev id en ce on th e reco rd

co ns id e r ed as a who le .” Rui z v. Gon za le s , 47 9 F.3 d 76 2, 76 5 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 07 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io ns om it te d)

. In or de r fo r us to rev ers e th e BIA, we m us t det erm in e
th at th e reco rd ev id en ce no t on ly su pp or ts a rev ers al , b u t c o mp el s it

. Se e Lya sh ch yn sk a v . U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 67 6 F .3d 96 2, 9 67 (11 th Cir . 20 12 ).

II I

In ord er to be el ig ib le fo r as y lu m , an a li en m us t m eet th e INA’s de fin it io n o f

a refu ge e. Se e 8 U.S.C. § 11 58 (b )(1 )(A). A refu ge e is de fin ed as “ an y pe rs on who is

ou ts id e an y co un try of su ch pe rs on ’s na ti on al i t y
. . . w h o is un ab le or un wil li ng to

ret ur n to

. . . th at co un try be cau se of pe rs ecu ti on or a well -fo un de d fear of pe rs ecu ti on

on acco un t of race , rel ig io n, na ti on al it y , m em be rs hi p in a pa rti cu la r so ci al gr ou p , or

po li ti cal op in io n.” 8 U.S.C. § 11 01 (a)( 42 )(A). The bu rd en is on th e al ie n to pr ov e he r

5 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 5 of 10refu ge e st at us an d th at sh e is el ig i b l e f o r as y lu m
. Se e Se

pu lv ed a v. U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 40 1 F.3d 12 26 , 12 30 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 05 ). “ In or de r to qu al ify fo r as y lu m , th e ap pl ic an t

m us t es ta b l i s h: (1 ) pa st pe rs ecu ti on on acco un t of a st at ut or il y pr ot ect ed gr ou nd or (2 ) well -fo un de d fear of f u t ur e pe rs ecu ti on on acco un t of a pr ot ect ed gr ou nd .” Li
Sh an Ch en v. U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 67 2 F.3 d 96 1, 96 4 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 11 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io ns

om it te d)

. An al ie n i s en ti tl ed to wit hh ol di ng of r em ov al if s he est ab li sh es th at he r “ li fe

or free do m wou ld be th reat en ed in th at co un try be cau se of th e al ie n’s race , rel ig io n,

na ti on al it y , m em

be rs hi p i n a pa rti cu la r so ci al gro up , or p ol it ic al op in io n.” 8 U.S.C. § 12 31 (b )(3 )(A). The bu rd en is on th e al ie n to sh ow th at it is m or e li ke ly th an no t th at
sh e wou ld be pe rs ecu te d or tor tu red up on he r ret ur n t o h er h om e co un try. Se e S eck , 66 3 F .3d at 1 36 4.
Ms

. Fejza co nt en ds th at th e BIA erre d in fin di ng th at th e pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p

o f “ wom en in Alb an ia who refu se th ei r fam il ie s’ arra ng ed m arri ag es ” di d n o t

co ns ti tu te a pa rti cu la r so ci al gro up . W e d is ag ree. 5

W e ha ve pr ev io us ly he ld th at t h e B I A ’s le ga l de fin it io n of “ pa rti cu la r so ci al

gr ou p” is en ti tl ed to Ch evr on de fere nc e. Se e Ca st i l l o- Ari as v. U.S. Att ’y Gen

. , 44 6

To the extent that Ms. Fe

jza arg ues in her brief that members of her proposed social g roup 5
s h ar e t h e re ligious status of being Muslim, we lack subject-matter jurisdiction to consider this arg ument beca

use she f ailed to ra ise it before the B I A. See Sundar , 328 F.3d a t 1323.

6 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 6 of 10F.3 d 11 90 , 11 96 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 0 6 )

. Th e BIA ha s in te rp ret ed th e ph ras e “ pa rti cu la r

so ci al gr ou p” to m ean “ a gr ou p of pe rs on s al l of who m sh are a co m m on , im m

ut ab le
ch arac te ris ti c.” Mat te r of Aco st a , 19 I. & N. Dec. 21 1, 23 3 (BIA 19 85 ), ov er ru le d on

ot he r gr ou nd

s by Matt er of Mog ha rr ab i , 19 I. & N

. Dec. 439 , 47 7 (BIA 19 87 ). The
BIA ha s sp eci fie d th at th is sh ared ch arac te ris ti c “ m ig ht be an in na te on e su ch as se x,

co lo r, or ki ns hi p ti es , or in so m e ci rcu m st an ces it m ig ht be a sh ared pa st ex pe rie nc e

su ch as fo rm er m il it ary le ad ers hi p or la nd own ers hi p.” Id

. Bu t th e BIA ack no wled ge d
th at th is co m

m on ch arac te ris ti c “ m

us t be on e th at th e m em

be rs of th e g r o u p e i t h e r

can no t ch an ge , or sh ou ld no t be req ui red to ch an ge be cau se it is fu nd am en ta l to th ei r
in di vi du al id en ti ti es or c on sc ie nc es .” Id

. S i n c e it s de ci si on in Aco st a , th e BIA ha s em ph as iz ed th at a pr op os ed so ci al

gr ou p’s “ so ci al vi si bi li ty – i.e., th e e x t e n t to whi ch m em be rs of a so ci et y pe rcei ve

t ho se wit h th e ch arac te ris ti c in qu es ti on as m em be rs of a so ci al gr ou p – i s o f

pa rti cu la r im

po rta nc e[.]” Mat te r of

E-A-G- , 24 I. & N. Dec. 59 1, 59 4 (BIA 20 08 ). The
BIA ha s al so an al y zed whe t h e r a pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p is de fin ed wit h su ffi ci en t

pa rti cu la rit y – i.e., whe th er it is to o am or ph ou s or in de te rm in at e. Se e In re A-M-E &
J-G-U- , 24 I. & N. Dec. 69 , 74 (BIA 2 00 7)

. Here, th e BIA de te rm in ed th at Ms

. Fejza’s pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p

– “w om en
in Alb an ia who refu se th ei r fam il ie s’ arra ng ed m arri ag es ” – di d no t m eet th e req ui si te

7 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 7 of 10st an da rd s of so ci al vi si bi li ty an d pa rti cu la rit y . Th e BIA co nc lu de d th at Ms . F ejza’s

pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p di d no t m eet th e so ci al vi si bi li ty st an da rd be cau se th e reco rd
di d no t in di cat e th at th e m em be rs of th is gr ou p are a di st in ct an d reco gn iz ab le gr ou p
in Alb an ia n so ci et y
. The BIA al so co nc lu de d th at th e pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p di d no t

m eet th e pa rti cu la rit y st an da rd be cau se it “ is no t de fin ed by an eco no m ic , cu lt ur al , or

et hn ic gr ou pi ng , lo cal it y , or ot he r ch arac te ris ti cs th at de fin e th e gr ou p in ot he r th an
in an am or

ph ou s fa sh io n.”
Ms

. Fejza arg ue s th at th e BIA erre d in no t co ns id eri ng he r ge nd er an d rel ig io n

as on e of th e en um erat ed cat eg or ie s fo r as y lu m an d wit hh ol di ng of rem ov al

. W e are

no t pe rs ua de d. W it h reg ard to ge n d er, th e BIA cl earl y ack no wled ge d Ms

. Fejza’s

arg um en t th at ge nd er was th e ke y im m ut ab le ch arac t eri st ic of he r pr op os ed so ci al

gr ou p, bu t th e BIA co rrec tl y de ci de d th at th e cl ai m is no t ba se d so le ly on ge nd er, an d
th at Ms

. Fejza ha s no t arg ue d an d th e reco rd do es no t sh ow th at be in g a wom an al on e

was su ffi ci en t t o s ub

ject h er t o p ers ecu ti on
. Se e Ni an g v . Go nz al es , 4 22 F.3 d 11 87 , 11 99 -1 20 0 (10 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (co nc lu di ng th at “ th e fo cu s wi th res pe ct to su ch cl ai m s
sh ou ld be no t on whe th er ei th e r g e n d e r co ns ti tu te s a so ci al gr ou p (wh ic h bo th

cert ai nl y do ) bu t on whe th er th e m em be rs of th at gro up are su ffi ci en tl y li ke ly t o be

pe rs ecu te d th at on e co ul d sa y th at th ey are pe rs ecu te d ‘on a cco un t of ’ th ei r

m em be rs hi p” ). The BIA al so ad dr es se d Ms

. Fejza’s rel ig io n arg um en t, bu t co nc lu de d

8 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 8 of 10th at th ere was no ev id en ce th at Ms

. Fejza’s refu sa l to en te r in to an arra ng ed m arri ag e

was ba se d up on he r rel ig io n, or th at he r pe rs ecu to rs were m ot iv at ed , at le as t in pa rt, by her re li gi on
. Ms

. Fejza ha s fai le d to m ak e an y pe rs ua si ve a r g u men t in di cat in g th at he r
pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p is ei th er so ci al ly vi si bl e wit hi n Alb an ia n so ci et y or is de fin ed
wit h pa rti cu la rit y
. And we fin d no ev id en ce in th e reco rd th at co m pe ls rev ers al of th e
BIA’s de te rm in at io n th at th e pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p do es no t m eet th e req ui si te

st an da rd s of so ci al vi si bi li ty an d pa rti cu la rit y
. Se e, e.g

. , Fay e v. Hol de r , 58 0 F.3 d 37 , 42 (1 st Ci r. 20 09 ) (aff

irming th e BIA’s de ci si on th at “ wom en who ha d a ch il d ou t of
wed l o c k / a r e c on si de red ad ul te rers be cau se th ey ga ve bi rth to a ch il d al le ge dl y no t
th ei r hu sb an d’s/ ha ve be en ab us ed by the ir h us ba nd s” di d n ot co ns ti tu te a pa rti cu la r

so ci al gr ou p be cau se it was no t so ci al ly vi si bl e or su ffi ci en tl y pa rti cu la r); Ramo sLo pe z v. Hol de r , 56 3 F.3 d 85 5, 86 2 (9 t h C i r
. 20 09 ) (h ol di ng th at pr op os ed so ci al

gr ou p of “ y ou ng Hon du ran m en who ha ve be en recr ui te d by ga ng s bu t refu se to joi n”
di d no t co n s ti tu te a pa rti cu la r so ci al gr ou p) ; Ca st il lo -Ari as , 44 6 F.3 d at 11 98 (aff irming th e BIA’s co nc lu si on th at “ no nc riminal in fo rm an ts wor ki ng ag ai ns t th e
C a l i dr ug cart el ” were bo th no t vi si bl e en ou gh an d to o nu m ero us or in ch oa t e ) ;
Rres hp ja v. Gon za le s , 42 0 F.3 d 55 1, 55 5 (6 t h C i r
. 20 05 ) (h ol di ng th at th e gr ou p

co ns is ti ng of “ y ou ng (o r th os e who ap pe ar to be y ou ng ), at tra ct iv e Alb an ia n wom en

9 Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 9 of 10who are fo rced in to pr os ti tu ti on ,” di d no t co ns ti t u t e a so ci al gr ou p un de r th e INA).

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm t h e B I A ’s de te rm in at io n be cau se we do no t fin d it to be

un reas on ab le

. Se e Ca st il lo -Ari as , 44 6 F.3 d at 11 96 (h ol di ng th at we m us t fo ll ow th e
BIA’s in te rp ret at io n th at a pr op os ed so ci al gr ou p do es no t q u a l i f y as a “ pa rti cu la r

so ci al gro up ,” un le ss th e in te rp ret at io n i s u nr eas on ab le ). 6

IV
Fi nd in g n o re ve rs ib le erro r in th e BIA’s or de r affi rm in g th e IJ ’s de ni al of th e Fejzas ’ ap pl ic at io ns for asylu m an d wi th ho ld in g o f rem ov al , we den y th e p et it io n.
P E T I T I O N D E N I E D .

Be cause we find no err or in the BI A’s deter mination that Ms. Fe

jza’s proposed social g roup 6 does not constitute a “par

ticular social g roup,” we need not discuss the BI A’s alterna tive holding that Ms. Fe jza’s perse cution was motivated by criminal intent and based on a persona l vendetta and not on acc ount of a prote cted g round.
10

Case: 12-10097 Date Filed: 09/04/2012 Page: 10 of 10