Juan Carcamo-Cruz v. Jefferson Sessions, III, No. 15-60850 (5th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 15-60850 Document: 00513947553 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/11/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-60850 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 11, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JUAN RAMON CARCAMO-CRUZ, 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. A201 116 463 Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Juan Ramon Carcamo-Cruz petitions this court for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his application for statutory withholding of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3). He does not brief any challenge to the denial of withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture. Accordingly, this issue is waived. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 15-60850 Document: 00513947553 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/11/2017 No. 15-60850 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003) (issues not briefed are considered abandoned). In his petition, Carcamo-Cruz contends that he is eligible for statutory withholding based on his membership in a particular social group (PSG), to wit, individuals who were part of a crowd of persons being robbed but were singled out, shot, and subsequently threatened by the MS-18 gang. He does not point to any evidence in the record or to any relevant legal authority that shows that his proposed PSG has a common immutable characteristic, particularity, or social distinction within the Salvadoran community. See Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517-22 (5th Cir. 2012), as modified by Hernandez-De La Cruz v. Lynch, 819 F.3d 784, 786-87 & n.1 (5th Cir. 2016); see Bouchikhi v. Holder, 676 F.3d 173, 181 (5th Cir. 2012). The petition for review is DENIED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.