Rodriguez Fuentes v. Barr, No. 19-1773 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit denied a petition for review of the BIA's final order affirming the IJ's order of removal. Petitioner and her son, natives and citizens of El Salvador, filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the Convention Against Torture (CAT), claiming that she was persecuted because of her family membership.
The court held that petitioner's financial resources, rather than her family membership, was the central reason for the persecution; the Board did not err in concluding that petitioner's first group -- membership in the Fuentes family -- is not cognizable; petitioner failed to prove past persecution on account of her membership in two other particular social groups -- Salvadoran female heads of households and vulnerable Salvadorean females; and, having failed to establish past persecution, petitioner is not entitled to a presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution. Consequently, petitioner cannot meet the higher standard of proof for withholding of removal.
Court Description: [Per Curiam - Before Smith, Chief Judge, and Melloy and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. Petitioner's financial resources, and not her family membership, was the central reason for her persecution by members of a gang, and the BIA did not err in concluding that her membership in the Fuentes family was not cognizable as a particular social group; nor did the BIA err in concluding that petitioner had failed to prove past persecution on account of her membership in two other particular social groups - Salvadoran female heads of household and vulnerable Salvadoran females; having failed to establish past persecution, petitioner was not entitled to a presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution, and her evidence was insufficient to establish a fear of particularized persecution on account of her membership in a social group; the BIA did not err in denying her claim for asylum based on a well-found fear of future persecution; having failed to establish her claim for asylum, petitioner necessarily cannot meet the higher standard of proof for withholding of removal.
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.