De Gutierrez v. Mukasey
Docket: No. 05-74270
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; November 2, 2008; Federal Appellate Court
Julia Dimas de Gutierrez and her two sons, citizens of El Salvador, filed a pro se petition for review challenging the Board of Immigration Appeals' summary affirmation of an immigration judge's (IJ) denial of Dimas’ applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The jurisdiction for the review is established under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and the review is conducted under the standard of substantial evidence. Dimas argues that she has a well-founded fear of future persecution based on her membership in a particular social group, specifically those who take steps to address legal wrongs by criminals. However, the court found this group not to be cognizable under immigration law, affirming the IJ’s conclusion that Dimas did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution. Prior case law, including Arteaga v. Mukasey and Ochoa v. Gonzales, supports the determination that similar claims of social group membership have been rejected. Additionally, since Dimas failed to establish eligibility for asylum, she also does not meet the more stringent criteria for withholding of removal. The IJ’s finding that Dimas is not entitled to CAT relief was upheld, as she did not prove that it is more likely than not that she would face torture upon returning to El Salvador, supported by Malhi v. INS. The petition for review was ultimately denied, and the ruling is not published or considered precedent except as allowed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.