IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-60553

Summary Calendar 

STEPHANIE SARAHI FIGUEROA-VILLEDA, 

Petitioner 

v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, 

Respondent 

Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals 

BIA No. A087 936 559

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Stephanie Sarahi Figueroa-Villeda, a native and citizen of Honduras, 

petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (BIA’s) dismissal of 

her appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) decision denying her application 

for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention 

Against Torture (CAT). In that application, Figueroa-Villeda alleged that if 

she were to be removed to Honduras, she would be murdered, sexually 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fif h Circuit

FILED

August 22, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-60553 Document: 00514126455 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/22/2017
No. 15-60553

2 

assaulted, raped, or physically attacked by gang members. We generally 

review only the decision of the BIA but will review the IJ’s decision where it 

affects the BIA’s reasoning. Le v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 98, 104 (5th Cir. 2016).

To support her claim for asylum and withholding of removal, FigueroaVilleda was required to show that she suffered persecution or has a wellfounded fear of future persecution in Honduras on the basis of her membership 

in a particular social group. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A); 8 U.S.C. 

§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(i); Sharma v. Holder, 729 F.3d 407, 411 (5th Cir. 2013). 

However, the particular social group that Figueroa-Villeda identified—

unattended young females who do not have a strong male presence—was too 

amorphous and would not be perceived as a group by Honduran society; thus, 

the group lacked sufficient social distinction and particularity. See OrellanaMonson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 521-22 (5th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the BIA 

did not err in determining that Figueroa-Villeda was not eligible for asylum or 

withholding of removal because she was not a member of a protected social 

group. See Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 785-86 (5th Cir. 

2016).

Moreover, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s decision to deny 

Figueroa-Villeda’s claim for CAT relief. See Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft, 303 

F.3d 341, 353 (5th Cir. 2002). The evidence showed that the Honduran 

government has taken steps to combat gang violence and sexual exploitation. 

Though its actions may be imperfect and may not guarantee the safety of any 

particular individual, they sufficiently support the finding that the Honduran 

government would not acquiesce to any effort by gang members to harm 

Figueroa-Villeda. See Ramirez-Mejia v. Lynch, 794 F.3d 485, 493-94 (5th Cir. 

2015); Tamara-Gomez v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 343, 350-51 (5th Cir. 2006). 

 Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED. 

 Case: 15-60553 Document: 00514126455 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/22/2017