Summary
The Fifth Circuit denied an El Salvadoran petitioner’s review of the BIA’s dismissal of his appeal from the IJ’s denial of a motion to reopen in absentia removal proceedings. The court held that the petitioner’s arguments regarding the BIA’s failure to examine the record, improper standard of review, and substantive asylum claims—including persecution based on a particular social group and lack of corroborating evidence—were either belied by the record or wholly unrelated. It also concluded that his conclusory assertions about inadequate notice, changed conditions in El Salvador, and exceptional circumstances were insufficient to raise those issues on appeal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the BIA failed to examine the entire record, failed to apply the proper standard of review, and summarily dismissed the appeal.
- Whether the BIA summarily dismissed based solely on subtle inconsistencies in testimony and asylum application.
- Whether the record compels the conclusion that Mejia-Cartagena belonged to a group subject to a pattern or practice of persecution.
- Whether Mejia-Cartagena articulated specific instances of persecution supported by documentation.
- Whether the IJ erroneously allowed lack of corroborating evidence to be fatal to the asylum claim.
Holdings
- The petition for review is denied because the petitioner's arguments are either belied by the record or wholly unrelated to the issues, and his conclusional assertions are insufficient to adequately raise the issues before this court.
Key quotations
“These arguments are either belied by the record or wholly unrelated to the issues in Mejia-Cartagena’s case.” (2)
“Mejia-Cartagena’s conclusional assertions that he was not afforded proper notice of the hearing, that conditions in El Salvador have changed, and that exceptional circumstances warrant reopening of his removal proceedings are insufficient to adequately raise these issues before this court.” (2)
Factual background
Moises Mejia-Cartagena, a native and citizen of El Salvador, was subject to removal proceedings. He failed to appear and an in absentia order was entered. He later moved to reopen the proceedings, arguing lack of notice, changed conditions in El Salvador, and exceptional circumstances. The IJ denied the motion, and the BIA dismissed the appeal.
Procedural history
The Immigration Judge denied the motion to reopen the in absentia removal proceedings. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed the appeal. Mejia-Cartagena then petitioned this court for review.