Brigida Romero-Vasquez v. Merrick Garland, No. 21-2212 (4th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2212 BRIGIDA ROMERO-VASQUEZ; O.E.O.R., Petitioners, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: November 8, 2022 Decided: December 6, 2022 Before RICHARDSON and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Victor E. Legorreta, Michael E. Rosado, LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL E. ROSADO, P.C., Laurel, Maryland, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Carl McIntyre, Assistant Director, Andrew Oliveira, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Brigida Romero-Vasquez and her minor son, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing their appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. In re Romero-Vasquez (B.I.A. Sept. 27, 2021). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION 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.