Background
Nallely Irazu Buenrostro Rodriguez, a citizen and native of Mexico, petitioned for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal of an Immigration Judge’s denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The petitioner argued that the agency failed to properly consider evidence regarding her ability to internally relocate and her proposed particular social group based on her American upbringing.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the internal relocation finding for substantial evidence. The agency found that the petitioner failed to show she could not relocate within Mexico to avoid future persecution on account of her sexual orientation and that it would not be unreasonable to expect her to relocate. The court found the record did not compel a contrary conclusion. The petitioner forfeited her challenge to the agency’s denial of her claim based on her second proposed particular social group because she did not contest that determination in her opening brief. The court also rejected arguments regarding the agency’s application of the wrong legal standard and due process violations as forfeited.
The dissent
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Ninth Circuit’s standard of review for internal relocation findings and emphasizes the requirement for petitioners to preserve all arguments in their opening briefs to avoid forfeiture.