FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 20 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IRMA CRUZ MATUTE-CALDERON; et No. 07-73345
al.,
Agency Nos. A096-333-754
Petitioners, A096-333-753
A096-333-752
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, MEMORANDUM*
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted May 12, 2011
San Francisco, California
Before: B. FLETCHER and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL,
District Judge.**
Irma Cruz Matute-Calderon and her siblings, Vicente Omar Matute-
Calderon and Mariela Matute-Calderon, petition for review of the immigration
judge’s (“IJ”) and Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders denying their
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, District Judge for the U.S. District
Court for Southern Texas, Houston, sitting by designation.
applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
Because the parties are familiar with the history of the case, we need not recount it
here.
Matute-Calderon and her siblings claim they have a well-founded fear of
persecution based on their membership in a “particular social group,” 8 U.S.C. §
1101(a)(42)(A). Because the record as developed does not establish that the
claimed social group has the requisite “social visibility” and “particularity” to
constitute a viable “social group” under immigration law, the BIA and IJ did not
err in denying the applications. See, e.g., Ramos-Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 855,
859–61 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that young Honduran men who resisted
recruitment into a Central American gang did not posses sufficient social visibility
or particularity to constitute a “particular social group”).
We need not and do not reach any other issues urged by the parties.
PETITION DENIED.
2