Jorge Baquedano-Berrios v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Case: 10-60214 Document: 00511343702 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/07/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 7, 2011 No. 10-60214 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JORGE BAQUEDANO-BERRIOS, also known as Jorge Rodolfo Baquedano, Petitioner v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A088 058 410 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jorge Baquedano-Berrios (Baquedano), a native and citizen of Honduras, has filed a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order denying his application for withholding of removal. Baquedano argues that he is eligible for withholding of removal because he experienced past persecution and has a well-founded fear of future persecution based on his religion, membership in a particular social group, and political opinion. * Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR . R. 47.5.4. Case: 10-60214 Document: 00511343702 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/07/2011 No. 10-60214 Baquedano did not argue in his appeal to the BIA that he was targeted based on his religion, political opinion, and membership in a particular economic and social class. Therefore, he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to these issues, and we lack jurisdiction to consider them. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Wang v. Ashcroft, 260 F.3d 448, 452-53 (5th Cir. 2001). Even assuming that Baquedano exhausted these claims and demonstrated that he was targeted based on his religion, political opinion, or membership in a particular economic and social class, the record does not compel a conclusion contrary to the BIA’s finding that Baquedano did not show past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. See Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2007). For the forgoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED. 2