Ana Ruth Morales-Escamilla v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANA RUTH MORALES-ESCAMILLA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-72149
Agency No. A098-997-613
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 21, 2015**
Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ana Ruth Morales-Escamilla, 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 and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
FILED
JAN 29 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 3 --

We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453
F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and grant in part the petition
for review, and we remand.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Morales-
Escamilla did not suffer past persecution in El Salvador. See Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d
929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000) (“Threats . . . constitute past persecution in only a small
category of cases, and only when the threats are so menacing as to cause
significant actual suffering or harm.”) (internal quotation marks and citations
omitted).
The agency also found Morales-Escamilla failed to establish 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
(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 Morales-Escamilla’s asylum and withholding of removal claims to
determine the impact, if any, of these decisions. See INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12,
16-18 (2002) (per curiam).
08-72149 2

-- 2 of 3 --

Each party shall bear its own costs for this petition for review.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;
REMANDED.
08-72149 3

-- 3 of 3 --