Case: 16-60268 Document: 00514120706 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/17/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 16-60268 FILED
Summary Calendar August 17, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
MARIA GLORIA ORTIZ-LICONA,
Petitioner
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A087 433 211
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Maria Gloria Ortiz-Licona, a native and citizen of Honduras, has filed a
petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
affirming the denial of her application for withholding of removal. Ortiz-
Licona contends that she demonstrated past persecution and a clear
probability of future persecution based on the cumulative effects of her ex-
husband’s mistreatment of her. She also challenges the determination of the
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-60268 Document: 00514120706 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/17/2017
No. 16-60268
BIA that any persecution would not be on account of her membership in a
particular social group.
Although Ortiz-Licona testified that her ex-husband engaged in verbal
and psychological abuse and mistreated her with respect to the marital home,
the record does not compel the conclusion that his conduct rose to the extreme
level required to constitute persecution. See Tesfamichael v. Gonzales, 469
F.3d 109, 116 (5th Cir. 2006); Eduard v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 182, 188 (5th Cir.
2004).
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s determination with respect
to the likelihood of future persecution. Ortiz-Licona did not present evidence
of any specific threat by her ex-husband should she return to Honduras.
Additionally, after her ex-husband’s abusive conduct began, she lived in
Honduras for about 10 years without suffering harm rising to the level of
persecution. Her children and other family members also continue to live in
Honduras without harm amounting to persecution. See Tesfamichael, 469 F.3d
at 116; Eduard, 379 F.3d at 188.
The BIA’s determination that Ortiz-Licona failed to make the requisite
showing regarding persecution is supported by substantial evidence. We
therefore need not reach her argument regarding membership in a particular
social group.
The petition for review is DENIED.
2