# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 19

- 60311 Summary Calendar

**Melvin Naun Guevara**

**- Enriquez,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus **William P. Barr, U.S. Attorney General,** Respondent

**.**

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A205 567 630

Before **Jolly, Elrod,** and **Graves,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *
Melvin Naun Guevara

- Enriquez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the denial by an Immigration Judge (IJ) of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. He chal lenges the BIA’s

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 4, 2020 Lyle W. C ayce Clerk Case: 19-60311 Document: 00515553120 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/04/2020No. 19

- 60311

2 determination that he did not establish past persecution or a well

- founded fear of future persecution based on a protected ground with respect to his claims for asylum and withholding of removal. Although the IJ also denied relief under t he Convention Against Torture, Guevara

- Enriquez did not appeal that t o the BIA, nor does he raise it here. As an initial matter, Guevara

- Enriquez did not properly exhaust his contentions that the BIA did not review his claims with the appropriate level of rigor and scrutiny and failed to consider all the evidence and applicable caselaw. See Omari v. Holder , 562 F.3d 314, 320 (5th Cir. 2009). Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to consider them. See id. at 320

- 21.
W ith respect to the substance of his asylu m and withholding claims,

w e review the BIA’s factual findings for substantial evidence and questions of law de novo. Lopez

- Gomez v. Ashcroft , 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). We “may not overturn the BIA’s factual findings unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.” Gomez

- Palacios v. Holder , 560 F.3d 354, 358 (5th Cir. 2009). Guevara

- Enriquez argues that he established past persecution and a well

- founded fear of future persecution based on his membership in two particular social groups: “youn g Guatemalan men perceived by the M

- 18 gang to be” police informants and “former acquaintances of the M

- 18 gang perceived to be police informants.” We find no error in the conclusion that Guevara

- Enriquez failed to establish persecution based on membershi p in a particular social group. Hernandez

De La Cruz v. Lynch , 819 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir. 2016); Orellana

- Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 518, 522 (5th Cir. 2012 ). Apart from the particular social group issue, the threats and harassment Guevara

- Enriquez suffered do not rise to the level of persecution. See Eduard v. Ashcroft , 379 F.3d 182, 188 (5th Cir. 2004). Thus, he has not shown that the record compels the

conc lusion that he is entitled to asylum or , it follows, withholding of removal. See Efe v. Ashcroft , 293 F.3d 899, 906 (5th Cir. 2002). Case: 19-60311 Document: 00515553120 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/04/2020No. 19

- 60311

3 **I T IS ORDERED THAT**  the petition for review is **DENIED** in part and **DISMISSED** in part for failure to exhaust administrative

r emedies. Case: 19-60311 Document: 00515553120 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/04/2020