Freddy Alexander Arce Garcia v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FREDDY ALEXANDER ARCE
GARCIA,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-72827
Agency No. A200-870-416
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Freddy Alexander Arce Garcia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
FILED
NOV 25 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 2 --

withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant
the petition for review and we remand.
In denying Arce Garcia’s withholding of removal claim, the agency found
he failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of
a protected ground. The BIA did not discuss the impact, if any, of this court’s
recent decision in Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2013) (en
banc). Further, when the IJ and BIA issued their decisions, they did not have the
benefit of this court’s decisions in 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 Arce Garcia’s
withholding of removal claim 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.
13-72827 2

-- 2 of 2 --