IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-60200

Summary Calendar

DAMARIS DEL CARMEN FLORES DE MUNDO,

Petitioner

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A206 843 081

Before JOLLY, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Damaris Del Carmen Flores de Mundo, a native and citizen of El 

Salvador, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals 

(BIA). The BIA dismissed her appeal, affirming the order of the immigration 

judge (IJ) that denied her requests for withholding of removal and relief under 

the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Flores de Mundo contends that she 

was entitled to withholding because she faces persecution for being a witness 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 17, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-60200 Document: 00514961186 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/17/2019
No. 18-60200

2

to a gang crime. She also contests the determination that she failed to prove

that the Salvadoran government would acquiesce to her torture, as required 

by the CAT.

We generally review only the BIA’s decision. But if the IJ’s decision 

affected the BIA’s, as it did in this case, we review it as well. Le v. Lynch, 819 

F.3d 98, 104 (5th Cir. 2016). Issues of law are reviewed de novo. Id. at 103. 

Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence, meaning reversal is 

proper only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Chen v. Gonzales, 

470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006).

The BIA held that Flores de Mundo did not meet her burden to prove 

that she would suffer persecution in El Salvador “because of” a protected 

ground. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). More precisely, she had not shown that 

her proffered protected class—“Young adult Salvadorian women from Puerto 

El Triunfo who have been witness to crime activities by the MS-13 Gang”—

was sufficiently socially distinct to qualify as a “particular social group.” See 

id.; Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 786–87 (5th Cir. 2016). The 

record does not compel the conclusion that Flores de Mundo’s society views 

witnesses to MS-13’s crimes as “substantially different from anyone else in the 

general population who resists [MS-13] or otherwise threatens their interests,” 

so we uphold the BIA’s rejection of her claim for withholding of removal. 

Hernandez-De La Cruz, 819 F.3d at 787.

Although the CAT does not require a nexus between the prospects of 

torture and a protected ground, it does require that the state would either 

instigate or acquiesce to the torture. 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.16(c)(2), 218.18(a)(1). The 

BIA upheld the IJ’s finding that Flores de Mundo had not proven this state 

action element. The record evidence of police and government corruption visà-vis the gangs in El Salvador does not compel a contrary finding because it 

 Case: 18-60200 Document: 00514961186 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/17/2019
No. 18-60200

3

does not speak conclusively to Flores de Mundo’s circumstances. See Morales 

v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2017).

Finally, Flores de Mundo argues that the BIA committed legal error by 

failing to address the IJ’s conclusion that the harm she suffered did not amount 

to torture or persecution. But there was no need to review that part of the IJ’s 

decision because the parts the BIA had already upheld meant that Flores de 

Mundo was not entitled to relief on either of her claims.

The petition for review is DENIED.

 Case: 18-60200 Document: 00514961186 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/17/2019