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

No. 21

- 60929 Summary Calendar

**Elida Hernandez**

**- Guerrero,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus
**Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A205 638 341

Before **Jones, Haynes,**  and **Oldham,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

Elida Hernandez

- Guerrero , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from a denial by the Immigration Judge (IJ) of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4.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 February 23, 2023 Lyle W. C ayce Clerk Case: 21-60929 Document: 00516653964 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2023No. 21

- 60929

2 Convention Aga inst Torture (CAT). She based her application on her kidnapping and assault by unknown individuals , which culminat ed in an extortion demand and on other extortion by gang members that she experienced as a business owner. Although we ordinarily review only the BIA’s reasoning, we may review the IJ’s decision to the extent it influences or is adopted by the BIA

. Singh v. Sessions , 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Contrary to Hernand ez

- Guerrero ’s challenge , the record does not compel a conclusion contrary to that of the BIA that she failed to establish the required nexus between the harm she experienced and a protected ground

. See Gonzales

- Veliz v. Barr , 938 F.3d 219, 231 (5th Cir. 2 019 ). This record, including Hernandez

- Guerrero ’ s own testimony , substantially supports the BIA’s finding that the assault and extortion were criminally financially motivated

. See id. at 224

. The lack of a nexus is dispositive of Hernandez

- Guerrero ’ s asylum claim , s ee Vasquez

- Guerra v. Garland , 7 F.4th 265, 269 (5th Cir. 2021), cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 1228 (2022) , and it is therefore unnecessary to address her remaining arguments as to asylum

. See INS v. Bagamasbad , 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976)

. As to Hernandez

- Guerrero’s challenge that the immigration court lacked jurisdiction because the notice to appear did not state the date and time of the hearing, we have expressly rejected the argument

. See Garcia v. Garland , 28 F.4th 644, 646

- 4 8 (5th Cir. 2022 ).

Hernandez

- Guerrero do es not challenge the agency ’ s conclusion that she failed to establish entitlement to CAT relief and has thus abandoned such an argument. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). As well, we lack jurisdiction to consider Hernandez

- Guerrero’s argument, raised for the first time before this court , that , under the withholding of removal standard , she must establish only that a protected ground is “a reason” for the persecution, rather than a “ce ntral reason” as is required for Case: 21-60929 Document: 00516653964 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/23/2023No. 21

- 60929

3 asylum claims. See Tibakweitira v. Wilkinson , 986 F.3d 905, 913 (5th Cir. 2021)

. Accordingly, the petition for review is **DENIED** in part and **DISMISSED** in part. Case: 21-60929 Document: 00516653964 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/23/2023