Juana Pablo Pablo v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUANA PABLO PABLO,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 19-73138
Agency No. A213-353-273
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted February 8, 2022
Seattle, Washington
Before: BYBEE, BEA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Juana Pablo Pablo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks
review of a negative credible fear determination in an expedited removal
proceeding. She argues this court has jurisdiction to hear her claim because 8
U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(A)(iii)’s bar on review of expedited removal proceedings
FILED
FEB 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

-- 1 of 2 --

governs only factual determinations, and her appeal raises questions of law. We
dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. Because the parties are familiar with
the facts, we do not recite them here.
Pablo argues the asylum officer and immigration judge made an error of law
by concluding that she was ineligible for asylum under the now-vacated “third-
country transit bar,” see Cap. Area Immigrants’ Rts. Coal. v. Trump, 471 F. Supp.
3d 25, 37 (D.D.C. 2020), and by failing to recognize women as a social group for
purposes of asylum and withholding of removal. She also argues that this court
has jurisdiction to review her claim because it concerns a legal question. But the
asylum officer and immigration judge independently based Pablo’s negative
credible fear determination on a finding of no fear of persecution or nexus. Setting
aside Pablo’s challenge to the third-country transit bar, we do not have jurisdiction
to review this other dispositive determination. See Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v.
Thuraissigiam, 140 S. Ct. 1959, 1966 (2020) (observing that “courts may not
review ‘the determination’ that an alien lacks a credible fear of persecution” in
expedited removal proceedings (quoting § 1252(a)(2)(A)(iii))). We therefore
dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --