Isabela Ortiz-Juarez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., No. 15-1271 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Loken, Bowman and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. Substantial evidence supports the agency's finding that petitioner failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground; the petition for review is denied.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-1271 ___________________________ Isabela Ortiz-Juarez, also known as Diana Carhual-Gomez lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States1 lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: September 8, 2015 Filed: September 9, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. 1 Loretta E. Lynch has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). Isabela Ortiz-Juarez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an immigration judge’s denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal.2 After careful consideration of the record and the parties’ submissions, see Davila-Mejia v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 624, 627 (8th Cir. 2008), we deny the petition, because we conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding that Ortiz-Juarez failed to establish past persecution, or a well-founded fear of future persecution, on account of any protected ground, see Mambwe v. Holder, 572 F.3d 540, 546 (8th Cir. 2009). The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 2 The ruling denying Convention Against Torture relief is not before us in this petition for review, because Ortiz failed to raise it before the BIA. -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.
