FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 3, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 14 49 5 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Age nc y No. A0 79 -4 76 -4 31 GERMAN A. CASTELLANO S, CONSTANZA HURTAD O, JULIANA CASTELLANOS, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pet it io ne rs , ve rs us U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Res po nd en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of aDeci si on of t he Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Jun e 3 , 20 11 ) Befo re HULL, PRYOR an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:Dr. Germ anA. Cast el lano s, a C ol om bi ancit iz enpro ceed in g pr o s e , pe ti ti on s fo r rev ie w of the Bo ardof I m m ig rat io n Ap pe al ’s (BIA’s) d eci si on de nyin g h is ap pl ic at io n fo r as y lu m an d h is pe ti ti on forwithh ol di ng of r em ov al un de r th e Imm ig rat io n a ndNati on al ity Act (I NA) an d re li ef u nd er the Uni te d Nati on s C on ve nt io n Ag ai ns t To rtu re (C AT). Cast el lano s ar gu es th atth e BIA erre d i n d et erm in in g tha t h e h adno t s uf fere d p as t p ers ecu ti on ba se d o n h is m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up or b as edon hi s p ol it ic al op in io n. He al so arg ue s th atth e BIA erredinde te rm in in g t ha t h e was in el ig ib le forCAT rel ie f. Becaus e we co nc lu de th atsubs tant ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e BIA’s d eci si on th atCas te ll an os was no t p ers ecu te d b ecau se of m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up or b ecau se of h is po li ti cal op in io ns an d tha t h e was no t en ti tl edto CAT rel ie f, we de ny his pe ti ti on . I. Cas te ll an os cam e to th e Uni te d S ta te s i n 2 00 0 wi th hi s wi fe an d d au gh te r, be cau se he ha d re cei ve d thr eat s fr om th e Rev ol ut io na ry

Arm edFo rces of Co lo m bi a (FARC ) aft er re fu si ng th e g ue rri ll as ’ reque stth athe joi n t he m an d at te ndto th ei r m em

be rs ’ m ed ic al ne ed s. Sh ortl y be fo re h is vi saex pi red , Cas te ll an os fil edanasylu m ap pl ic at io n. In 2 00 7, the Depa rtment o f Hom el an d

1 Castellanos is the lead pe titioner in this asylum case; his wife and daughter a re 1 derivative petitioners. 2Secu rit y

be ga n re m ov al pro ceed in gs ag ai ns t Ca st el lano s. Th e Imm ig rat io n J ud ge an d B IA bo th de ni edCas te ll an os ’s asylum ap pl ic at io n a ndhi s cl ai m s fo r withh ol di ng of r em ov al un de r th e INA an d fo r CAT rel ie f. II. W e rev ie w any leg al co nc lu si on s m ad e b y th e BIA de no vo , bu t we m ay no t rejectit s fa ctua l fi nd in gs un le ss th ey are s o u ns up po rte d b y

ev id en ce tha t the reco rdco m

pe ls it . Kaze mza de h v . U.S. Att ’y Gen . , 57 7 F .3d13 41 , 13 50 –5 1 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 09 ). The INA all ows th e Att orne y Gene ral to gra ntasylu m

to an y refu ge e, th atis , so m eo ne who is un ab le or u nwi ll in g t o re tu rnto hi s h om e co un try “be cau se of pe rs ecu ti on or awell -fo un de d fe ar o f pe rs ecu ti on onacco un t o f rac e, rel ig io n, na ti on al ity , m em

be rs hi p i n apa rti cu lar so ci al gro up , or p ol it ic al op in io n.” 8 U.S.C. §§ 11 01 (a)( 42 ), 11 58 (b )(1 )(A). Si m il arl y , to qu al ify for wi th ho ld in g o f rem ov al , an a li enm

us t es tabl is h t ha t upo n re tu rnto hi s h om e co un try it i s m or e li ke ly than n otth athi s l ife or f reed om wou ldbe th reat en edbe cau se of h is race , rel ig io n, n at io na li ty, m em be rs hi p i n apa rti cu lar so ci al gro up , or p ol it ic al op in io n. Se pu lv ed a v . U.S. Att ’y Gen . , 40 1 F .3d12 26 , 12 32 (11 thCir . 20 05 ). If anali en can no t m eetth e st an da rdforasylu m , he i s u su al ly unabl e to m eetth e “ m or e st rin ge nt ” st an da rdforwithh ol di ng of r em ov al . Id. at12 32 –3 3. Th e BIA 3co nc lu de d tha t Ca st el lano s h adfai le d t o e st ab li sh th athe was p ers ecu te d b y th e FARC b ecau se of h is m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up or b ecau se of h is po li ti cal op in io n a ndas s uc h was no t en ti tl edto asylu m or wi th ho ld in g o f rem ov al . W e ag ree. Cas te ll an os arg ue s tha t the FARC p ers ecu te d h im be cau se of h is m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up an d h is im pu te d p ol it ic al op in io n. W e fi rs t ad dr es s 2 Cas te ll an os ’s po li ti cal -p ers ecu ti on cla im s an d t he n turn t o h is so ci al -g ro up cla im s. W e n eedno t ad dr es s wh ethe r th e act s co m m it te d b y th e FARC ris e to pe rs ecu ti on be cau se we co nc lu de th atth e BIA’s d et erm in at io n t ha t h e was no t p ers ecu te d o n acco un t o f a p ro te ct edgro un d was supp orte d b y “ reas on ab le , subs tant ia l, an d pr ob at iv e ev id en ce” i n the reco rd , when co ns id eredinit s en ti rety . INS v. Eli as Za ca ri as , 50 2 U.S. 4 78 , 48 1 (1 99 2) . Cas te ll an os cla im s tha t h e was pe rs ecu te d b ecau se of h is refu sa l t o jo in th e FARC. Th is refu sa l, Ca st el lano s s ay s, i s the ul ti m at e ex pr es si on of p ol it ic al op in io n. Th e g ov ern m en t n ot es th atth e FARC ’s in te res t i n C as te ll an os was due to hi s m ed ic al tra in in g a ndth e g ue ril la s n ev er ex pr es se d a ny kn owl ed ge of h is

Castellanos also argues that he w as per secute d based on a mix ed-motive of soc ial-group 2 membership and political opinion. B ut beca use this argument was not ra ised befor e the B IA, we are without jurisdiction t o consider it. Amaya- Artunduaga v. U.S. Att’y G en. , 463 F.3d 1247, 1250 (11th Cir. 2006). 4po li ti cal op in io n o r hi s fa m il y ’s ass oc ia ti on with t he Lib eral Party inCo lo m

bi a. Thi s co urt h as he ldth atanali en ’s refu sa l t o c oo pe rat e wit h g ue rri ll as is no t en ou ghto est ab li sh th atth e al ie n was pe rs ecu te d due to hi s p ol it ic al op in io n. Rod ri gu ezMoral es v. U.S. Att ’y Gen . , 48 8 F .3d88 4, 8 90 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ). And gi ve n tha t the ev id en ce i n the reco rdsu gg es ts th atth e FARC ’s in te res t i n Cas te ll an os was o nl y

du e to th e fac t h e is a do ct oran d t he ir p ers ecu ti on aro se on ly aft er h e ref

us edto joi n the m , we can no t s ay th atth e rec or d c om

pe ls a de te rm in at io n tha t the FARC p ers ecu te d C as te ll an os be cau se of h is po li ti cal op in io n. Cas te ll an os als o c la im s tha t the FARC p ers ecu te d h im be cau se of h is m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up . The s oc ia l g ro up Cas te ll an os cla im s h e was a m em be r of is co m pr is edof d oc to rs who ha ve refu se d t o jo in th e FARC . To es tabl is h p ers ecu ti on on acco un t o f m em be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up , an a li enm us t sh ow tha t the gro up ’s m em be rs sh are i m

m ut ab le ch arac te ris ti cs an d a re s oc ia ll y vi si bl e. Ca st il lo -Ari as v. U.S. Att ’y Gen . , 44 6 F .3d11 90 , 11 94 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). Altho ug h p as t ex pe rie nc es are i m m ut ab le , th at“ do es no t m eanth atan y pa st ex pe rie nc e th atm ay

be sh aredby oth ers su ffi ces to de fin e a p art ic ul ar s oc ia l g ro up fo r as y lu m

purp os es .” Id. Rel y in g o n t he Supr em e Co urt’s o pi ni on in Eli as Za ca ri as , th e BIA co nc lu de d tha t p ers ecu ti on foron e’s refu sa l t o jo in th e FARC 5co ul d n otbe a de fin in g c ha ract eri st ic of aso ci al gro up . Furt he rm or e, th e BIA

co nc lu de d tha t the re was no ev id en ce tha t the FARC p ers ecu te d C as te ll an os be cau se of h is m em

be rs hi p i n aso ci al gro up ; ra th er, the ev id en ce d em on strat ed th athe was p ers ecu te d b ecau se he refu se d t o jo in th e FARC . W e ag ree t ha t the reco rddo es no t co m

pe l a c on tra ry

co nc lu si on . Bec au se Cas te ll an os ha s fa il edto de m on strat e th atth e rec or d c om pe ls a de te rm in at io n tha t h e was pe rs ecu te d o n a cco un t o f an y pro te ct edgro un d, we d en y hi s p et it io n fo r rev ie w. Andbe cau se Cas te ll an os ha s fa il edto de m on strat e th atth e reco rdco m

pe ll eda de te rm in at io n t ha t h e qua li fie d fo r as y lu m , he h as als o fa il edto sh ow the reco rdco m

pe ll eda de te rm in at io n t ha t h e qua li fie d fo r th e h ig he r withh ol di ng -o f-re m ov al st an da rd . Se pu lv ed a , 40 1 F .3dat 1 23 2– 33 . W e n ow turn t o C as te ll an os ’s cla im forCAT rel ie f. To es tabl is h e li gi bi li ty fo r CAT rel ie f Cas te ll an os ha d t o d em on st rat e th atitwere m or e li ke ly than n ot th athe wou ldbe to rtu redby Col om bi ango ve rn m en t o r with i ts acqui es cen ce o r in st ig at io n. 8 C.F.R. § 20 8.1 8. Th e BIA co nc lu de d t ha t Ca st el lano s fa il edto pr es en t an y

ev id en ce ab ou t the li ke li ho odth athe wou ldbe to rtu redinCo lo m bi a. W e ag ree. Acco rd in gl y , th e rec or d d oe s n otco m pe l tha t we re ve rs e th e BIA’s de te rm in at io n a ndwe can no t g ran t h im rel ie f. PETI TI ON DENI ED. 6