Opinion ID: 149042
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Youth Resistant to Gang Recruitment

Text: As to Larios's first claim, the IJ concluded that Larios, though credible, nonetheless failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution on account of membership in a particular social group. Specifically, the IJ found that Larios feared future persecution at the hands of gang members seeking him out for recruitment purposes or retaliating against him for refusing to join their gang. Nevertheless, the IJ determined that if Larios was indeed targeted by gangs, the motivation would not be on account of his membership in a particular social group but would rather be an attempt to increase the gang's numbers. The IJ also found that the gang members may target Larios under the mistaken belief that because he is returning from the United States, he comes from a family with money. In support of his findings, we first note that the IJ properly applied controlling BIA case law. See Matter of S-E-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 579 (BIA 2008)(holding that Salvadoran youths who have been subjected to recruitment efforts by the MS-13 gang and who have resisted membership in the gang do not constitute a particular social group); Matter of E-A-G-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 591 (BIA 2008)(holding that a young Honduran male failed to establish membership in particular social group of persons resistant to gang membership, as evidence failed to establish that Honduran society, including gang members themselves, would perceive those opposed to gang membership as members of a social group); see also Matter of A-M-E & J-G-U-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 69 (BIA 2007). Moreover, Larios's claim is foreclosed by our recent decision in Mendez-Barrera. There, we held that young [El Salvadoran] women recruited by gang members who resist such recruitment do not constitute a legally cognizable social group because the proposed group lacks social visibility and is not sufficiently particular. Mendez-Barrera, 602 F.3d at 27. In order to satisfy the social visibility criterion, a group must be generally recognized in the community as a cohesive group. Id. at 26. Like the petitioner in Mendez-Barrera, Larios has failed to provide even a scintilla of evidence to this effect. Id. Furthermore, Larios has failed to pinpoint any group characteristics that render members of the putative group socially visible in [Guatemala]. Id. Larios's proposed group does not supply an adequate profile for establishing membership, and therefore, the putative group-[youth resistant to gang recruitment]-is not socially visible. Id. at 26-27. Additionally, Larios's proposed social group is not sufficiently particular to be legally cognizable. Id. at 27. As we stated in Mendez-Barrera, it is virtually impossible to identify who is or is not a member. There are, for example, questions about who may be considered young, the type of conduct that may be considered recruit[ment], and the degree to which a person must display resist[ance]. These are ambiguous group characteristics, largely subjective, that fail to establish a sufficient level of particularity. Id. (quoting Faye, 580 F.3d at 42). Larios's purported social group of youth resistant to gang recruitment suffers from these same infirmities. Accordingly, because this putative social group is neither socially visible nor sufficiently particular, we conclude that the IJ did not err in denying Larios's claim for asylum based on Larios's membership in this particular group.