Case Name: Federico LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-20
Citations: 585 F. App'x 471
Docket Number: No. 10-70804
Parties: Federico LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, GOULD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 471–472

Head Matter:
Federico LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 10-70804.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 14, 2014.
Filed Oct. 20, 2014.
Sharon A. Healey, Law Office of Sharon A. Healey, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner.
Benjamin Zeitlin, Trial, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: LEAVY, GOULD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Federico Lopez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the petition for review and we remand.
In denying Lopez's withholding of removal claim, the agency found Lopez failed to establish a nexus to a protected ground. When- the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case they did not have the benefit of this court's decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir.2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir.2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir.2014), or the BIA's decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand Lopez's withholding of removal claim to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18, 123 S.Ct. 353, 154 L.Ed.2d 272 (2002) (per curiam). In light of this remand, we do not reach Lopez's remaining challenges to the agency's denial of his withholding of removal claim at this time.
PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.