MALLOLA OSORIO-MENDEZ V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-73737 (9th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED OCT 01 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MALLOLA ESPERANZA OSORIOMENDEZ, No. 10-73737 Agency No. A072-532-123 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 23, 2014** Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Mallola Esperanza Osorio-Mendez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order dismissing her appeal of an immigration judge s decision denying her motion to * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the petition for review and remand. In denying Osorio-Mendez s motion to reopen, the BIA, inter alia, found Osorio-Mendez failed to establish she would be harmed on account of a protected ground. When the BIA issued its decision, it did not have the benefit of this court s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081, 1083 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc) (recognizing witnesses who testify against gang members may constitute a particular social group), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2014), or the BIA s decisions in Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227 (BIA 2014), and Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 208 (BIA 2014). Thus, we remand for the agency to determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam). PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED. 2 10-73737

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.