Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 60422 Su m m ar y Cal endar
ADI S Z ULEM A M ART I NEZ- GARCIA P et i t i on er
v. ERI C H H OLD ER, J R, U S ATTORN EY GE N ERA L Res po nde nt
Pet i t i o n f

o rRev i e w o f

a n Ord e ro f

t he B o a r do f Im m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls B IAN o. A 78 283 608
B ef ore D AV IS, G A R Z A , an d P R A D O , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * A di s Zul em a M ar t i nez- G ar c i a (M ar t i n ez ) , t oge t herw i t h herder ivat ive ben ef i ci ari es M an u elO bd u l i o R eyes M era s a n d V an essa Y am al y R eyesM a r tin e z , p e tit io n fo rre v ie w o f th e d e c is io n o f th e B o a r do f Im m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls (B IA) a ffir m in gth e d e c is io n s o f th e im m i g r a t io n ju d g e (IJ ) to d e n yth e ir ap pl i cat i on f

or asyl u m , w i t h h ol di n g of rem oval, an d rel i ef

un der t h e C on ven t i on A g a in s t T o r tu r e . T h e p e tit io n e r s co n te n dth a t t h e IJ e r r e d i n d e n y in gth e ir requ estt o subp oen a S peci alA gen tJoseph L erm a of t h e U n i t ed S t ates United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Ma rc h 6, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 60422

2 Im m i grati on a n d C u st om s E n f orcem en tto test i f

y at the h eari n g. Th ey h ave n ot es t abl i she d t hatt he I J abus ed herdi sc r et i on i n co ncl udi ng t hatLer m a’ s l ive te s tim o n yw a s n o t e s s e n tia l to th e p r o c e e d in g s . S ee8 C .F .R
. § 1 0 0 3 .3 5 (b )( 3 ); Gu e v a r aFlo r e s v . I

NS , 7 8 6 F .2d 1 2 4 2 , 1 2 5 2 (5t h C ir. 1 9 8 6 ). T h e p e tition e rs co n te n dth a t th e yh a v e p re se n te dcr e d ib le e v id e n ce of a
w el l

- f ou n ded fear of

pers e c uti on i n H on du ras based u pon M art i n ez’ s c ooperati on w i t h U ni t ed St at es of f i c i al s t o p rovi de i nf or m at i on abo utan i nt er nat i onal
sm u ggl i n g ri n g. Th ey m ai n t ai n t h a t t h ey h ave establ i shed t h at th ey are m e m b e r s o f ap a r tic u la rs o c ia l g r o u p , co m p r is in ge ith e rth e irim m e d ia te fa m ily or “i n divi du al s w h o ha ve cooperated w i t h governm en tau th o rities i n t h e past a n d , b e c a u s e o f s u c h co o p e r a tio n , a r e b e in gta r g e te db yan e tw o r ko f c r im in a ls t h at th e governm en ti s u n able t o control
. ” T h e petit i on ers h ave n otest abli shed t hatt hey ar e s ubj ec t t o pe r se c ut i on as m em ber s of a g ener al l y vi sibl e s oc i al g r o u p . S ee I

n r eE

-A

- G- , 2 4 I & N D e c . 5 91 , 5 94 ( BI A 200 7)
. A dd i t i on al l y, t he peti t i on ers’fear ari ses f rom a persona l di spu t e w i t h t h e sm u ggl i n g ri n g, w h i ch d o e s n o t q u a lifyfo ra s y lu m . S ee E d u a rdv. A sh cr oft , 379 F
. 3d 182 , 190 ( 5th C i r. 2 0 0 4 ); seealso E-A

- G- , 24 I & N D ec . at594. B ecau se t h e petit i on ers h ave n otsat i sfie d th e asyl u m st an da rd, t h ey c a n n o t m e e t t h e m o r e s tr in g e n t s ta n d a r dfo rw i th h o ld in go f r e m o v a l. S ee E d u ard , 279 F
. 3dat 186 n. 2. Th e petit i on ers’cl ai m s un der t h e C on ven t i on Agai ns tTo r t ur e i s a l s o w i t ho utm e r i t , a s t he r e cord d o e s no tc o m pe laf i ndi ng th a t t h e H o n d u r a n g o v e r n m e n t w ill a c q u ie s c e in a n yt o r t u r e . S ee Chen v. G on zales , 4 7 0 F .3 d1 1 3 1 , 1 1 4 1 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ); T am ara-G om ez v. G on zales , 447 F .3 d 3 4 3 , 3 5 1 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ); B a h v. A sh cr oft , 3 4 1 F .3d 3 4 8 , 3 5 2 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 3 ). T h e p e t i t i o n f

o rr e v i e w i s DE NI ED
.