NELSON FOLGAR V. WILLIAM BARR, No. 15-71072 (9th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 26 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NELSON ARMANDO FOLGAR, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 15-71072 Agency No. A094-290-134 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Judge Submitted August 7, 2019** Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges. Nelson Folgar, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order affirming an asylum officer’s negative reasonable fear determination. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). “We review the IJ’s determination that [Folgar] did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture for substantial evidence.” Bartolome v. Sessions, 904 F.3d 803, 811 (9th Cir. 2018). Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Folgar failed to establish that he was or would be persecuted on account of a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”); see also Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))). “Similarly, [Folgar] failed to provide any evidence that he would be or was in danger of being tortured with the acquiescence of the government.” Bartolome, 904 F.3d at 814. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 15-71072

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.