Filed: Aug. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3617 _ Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals _ Submitted: August 15, 2016 Filed: August 18, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Salvadoran citizen Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez petitions for review of a
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3617 _ Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals _ Submitted: August 15, 2016 Filed: August 18, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Salvadoran citizen Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez petitions for review of an..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-3617
___________________________
Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner
v.
Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
____________
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
____________
Submitted: August 15, 2016
Filed: August 18, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Salvadoran citizen Carmen Elizabeth Rivas-Alvarez petitions for review of an
order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s denial
of petitioner’s application for asylum and withholding of removal. After careful
consideration, we conclude that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports
the agency’s decision, see Quinonez-Perez v. Holder,
635 F.3d 342, 344 (8th Cir.
2011), because petitioner failed to establish that the claimed past persecution, or the
claimed fear of future persecution, was on account of a protected asylum ground, see
DeCastro-Gutierrez v. Holder,
713 F.3d 375, 380-81 (8th Cir. 2013); Matul-
Hernandez v. Holder,
685 F.3d 707, 712-13 (8th Cir. 2012); Constanza v. Holder,
647
F.3d 749, 753-54 (8th Cir. 2011).
The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-