Lesly Patrosinia Guevara-Torres, et al v. U.S. Attorney General

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________

No. 19-12727
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________

Agency No. A205-634-432

LESLY PATROSINIA GUEVARA-TORRES,
a.k.a. Lelsy Maribel Guevara-Arias,
a.k.a. Lelsy Guevara-Torres,
a.k.a. Elsy Maribel Guevara-Arias,
JORDY ALEJANDRO VELASQUEZ-GUEVARA,
DENINSON JORDANY BACA-GUEVARA,

Petitioners,

versus

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.
________________________

Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
________________________
(February 12, 2020)
Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 1 of 3

2

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, GRANT and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Lesly Guevara-Torres and her two children petition for review of the order
of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the denial of her applications for
asylum and withholding of removal. Guevara-Torres argues that the Board erred in
concluding that her particular social group—Honduran women exposed to gender-
based violence because of the male-dominated society—was not cognizable under
the Immigration and Nationality Act, and she argues that she suffered past
persecution and has a well-founded fear of future persecution. We dismiss in part
and deny in part her petition for review.
If a petitioner fails to exhaust her administrative remedies for a claim for
relief, we lack jurisdiction to consider the claim even when the Board addresses it
sua sponte. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Amaya-Artunduaga v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 463 F.3d
1247, 1250–51 (11th Cir. 2006).
The Board did not err in concluding that Guevara-Torres failed to establish
her status as a refugee under the Act by membership in a “particular social group.”
In Castillo-Arias v. U.S. Attorney General, we deferred to the administrative
criteria for establishing a cognizable social group, including that the members of
the group share a common characteristic that is immutable or fundamental to their
individual identities or consciences. 446 F.3d 1190, 1196–97 (11th Cir. 2006). And
Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 2 of 3

3

we explained that a social group should not be defined so broadly that it becomes
“a catch all for all groups who might claim persecution.” See id. at 1196–98. A
particular social group cannot be defined by the underlying harm asserted as
persecution. Amezcua-Preciado v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 943 F.3d 1337, 1345 (11th Cir.
2019). The Board correctly concluded that Guevara-Torres’s alleged social group
lacked particularity, is not socially distinct, and is defined by the risk of harm
asserted by her as persecution. As a result, we deny her petition in part. And
because Guevara-Torres failed to exhaust her arguments about suffering past
persecution or having a well-founded fear of future persecution, we lack
jurisdiction to consider them and dismiss her petition in part.
PETITION DENIED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART.
Case: 19-12727 Date Filed: 02/12/2020 Page: 3 of 3