Bringas-Rodriguez v. Lynch

Courts will uphold the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decisions regarding asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture protection when substantial evidence for reversal is lacking.

Carlos Bringas-Rodriguez is an HIV positive, gay Mexican citizen who challenged the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) protection, and his motion for remand to the Immigration Judge because of his recent HIV diagnosis. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of asylum, on the grounds that Bringas did not sufficiently demonstrate that the government was unwilling or unable to control his attackers. Additionally, Brings was unable to prove that the Mexican government itself perpetrated the attacks. The panel agreed with the BIA that Bringas' conclusory statements, in light of recent country reports showing Mexico’s improving stance on homosexuality, were insufficient. The panel also upheld the BIA’s conclusion that Bringas did not have a well founded fear of persecution, because Bringas failed to raise the argument that he was part of a protected group before the BIA. Further, the panel upheld the BIA’s denial of Bringas CAT claim, because they did not find sufficient evidence to support Bringas’ position that he would more likely than not be tortured with the acquiescence of the Mexican government, because the IJ found that Bringas could move to more tolerant parts of Mexico and that current conditions in Mexico did not support Bringas’ position. Lastly, the panel refused to remand the case to the BIA despite Bringas’ recent HIV status. PETITION DENIED.