United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

____________

No. 23-60478

Summary Calendar

____________

Maria De Lourdes Sanchez Garcia, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

______________________________

Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals

Agency No. A209 961 767

______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:

*

Maria De Lourdes Sanchez Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, 

petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals 

(BIA) affirming the denial of asylum and withholding of removal.1 We review 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

1 The BIA’s decision also involved the denial of Sanchez Garcia’s applications for 

cancellation of removal or for protection under the Convention Against Torture, but she 

does not contest those claims here.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 10, 2024

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 23-60478 Document: 46-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2024
No. 23-60478

2

the BIA’s decision and consider the decision of the immigration judge (IJ)

only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Martinez Manzanares v. Barr, 925 

F.3d 222, 226 (5th Cir. 2019).

While Sanchez Garcia lists the question of nexus in her statement of 

issues, she does not adequately brief any argument in the body of her brief 

challenging the BIA’s determination that she failed to demonstrate the 

requisite nexus for asylum and withholding of removal. She has thus waived 

the issue. See Chambers v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 445, 448 n.1 (5th Cir. 2008).

The Government asserts that partial remand might be warranted 

because the BIA did not explicitly address Sanchez Garcia’s claims 

concerning one of her alleged persecutors. Partial remand is not warranted, 

as Sanchez Garcia has failed to adequately brief any argument that past or 

future persecution, by any of the alleged persecutors, was or will be on 

account of a protected ground. Her failure on the issue of nexus is dispositive 

for asylum and withholding of removal. See Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 

219, 224 (5th Cir. 2019).

In any event, there is no realistic possibility that the BIA would have 

concluded that she was eligible for asylum or withholding of removal, 

regardless of her claims concerning the alleged persecutor in question. See

Luna-Garcia v. Barr, 932 F.3d 285, 291 (5th Cir. 2019). As the IJ determined, 

her proposed particular social group of single mothers from Mexico under 

threats from multiple parties is not cognizable because it is impermissibly 

defined in a circular manner, as it is defined by reference to the alleged harm. 

See Jaco v. Garland, 24 F.4th 395, 407 (5th Cir. 2021); Matter of W-G-R-, 26 

I.&N. Dec. 208, 215 (BIA 2014). Sanchez Garcia does not address political 

opinion as a protected ground, and she has failed to demonstrate a protected 

ground for her claims concerning any of the alleged persecutors.

The petition for review is DENIED.

Case: 23-60478 Document: 46-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2024