Andover Healthcare, Inc. v. 3M Company

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-2440
___________________________
Carlos Rueda-Juarez
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: March 21, 2016
Filed: March 24, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Guatemalan citizen Carlos Rueda-Juarez petitions for review of an order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding an immigration judge’s (IJ’s) denial

-- 1 of 2 --

of his application for withholding of removal. We conclude that substantial evidence1
supports the determination that Rueda-Juarez does not qualify for withholding of
removal based on his imputed political opinion. See Ming Li Hui v. Holder, 769 F.3d
984, 986 (8th Cir. 2014) (reviewing BIA’s decision as final agency action, but also
considering findings and reasoning of IJ if BIA adopted them; decisions are reversed
only if petitioner’s evidence is so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail
to find in his favor); see also Juarez Chilel v. Holder, 779 F.3d 850, 854 (8th Cir.
2015) (to qualify for withholding of removal, alien must show that based on protected
ground, he experienced past persecution or there is clear probability his life or
freedom would be threatened in proposed country if he was forced to return); cf.
Marroquin-Ochoma v. Holder, 574 F.3d 574, 578 (8th Cir. 2009) (even assuming
gang operated in political framework, generalized political motive for its forced
recruitment would be insufficient to establish that members believed resistance to
recruitment was based on anti-gang political motive, and no additional evidence in
record supported Guatemalan petitioner’s contention that threats were on account of
imputed anti-gang political opinion). The petition for review is denied.
______________________________
Rueda-Juarez does not challenge the denial of relief under the Convention1
Against Torture. See Wanyama v. Holder, 698 F.3d 1032, 1035 n.1 (8th Cir. 2012)
(waiver of claims).
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --