BLANCA CARILLO-CERON V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 12-70696 (9th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED DEC 18 2014 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BLANCA ESPERANZA CARILLOCERON, No. 12-70696 Agency No. A099-467-134 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted December 9, 2014** Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Blanca Esperanza Carillo-Ceron, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the * 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). Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for review, and we remand. We reject Carillo-Ceron’s contentions related to streamlining because the BIA did not issue a streamlined decision. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Carillo-Ceron’s CAT claim because Carillo-Ceron failed to establish it is more likely than not she would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). In denying Carillo-Ceron’s asylum and withholding of removal claims, the agency found Carillo-Ceron failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. When the IJ and BIA issued their decisions in this case they did not have the benefit of this court’s decisions in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc), Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013), and Pirir-Boc v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1077, 1079 (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 Carillo-Ceron’s asylum and withholding of removal claims to 2 12-70696 determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (per curiam). In light of this remand, we do not reach CarilloCeron’s remaining challenges to the agency’s denial of her asylum and withholding of removal claims at this time. Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part; REMANDED. 3 12-70696
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.
