The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied a petition for review from Consuelo de Maria Mejia Romero, a Guatemalan citizen who sought asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court upheld the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision to deny all her applications in a non-precedential opinion filed Jan. 21.
Mejia Romero operated a beauty salon in Guatemala from 2011 until she left for the United States in April 2015. Her case centered on alleged gang threats and extortion attempts at her business, though her testimony revealed inconsistencies that may have undermined her credibility before immigration authorities.
According to court records, Mejia Romero initially provided a written declaration stating that "gangs in Guatemala would frequent the beauty salon and demand money" and that she "was threatened by the gangs on several occasions." However, when she testified before Immigration Judge Arya Ranasinghe, she significantly walked back those statements, telling the court she had no issues with gangs other than two specific incidents in March 2015.
In the first incident, two gang members entered Mejia Romero's salon and demanded all her money at gunpoint. She gave them 500 quetzales, which was all she had at the time. The gang members threatened that she "should know what is going to happen to [her]" if she did not give them 15,000 quetzales the next time they returned. A few days later, the same two gang members returned to her business, took her purse, and pushed her.
The case proceeded through the immigration court system with Immigration Judge Ranasinghe initially hearing the matter. The Board of Immigration Appeals subsequently affirmed the denial of Mejia Romero's applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. The BIA's decision led to Mejia Romero's petition for review to the Third Circuit.
The Third Circuit panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Matey, Chung and Ambro, reviewed the case under the court's Local Appellate Rule 34.1(a), which allows for streamlined consideration of certain immigration appeals. Circuit Judge Ambro authored the opinion for the court.
The court's decision was marked as "not precedential," meaning it does not establish binding precedent for future cases. Under the Third Circuit's Internal Operating Procedure 5.7, such dispositions do not constitute binding authority that must be followed in subsequent litigation.
The case reflects ongoing challenges faced by asylum seekers from Central America, particularly those fleeing gang violence. Guatemala has experienced significant gang-related violence, with criminal organizations often targeting business owners for extortion. However, establishing eligibility for asylum requires demonstrating persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution based on protected characteristics such as race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.
Credibility often plays a crucial role in immigration proceedings, and inconsistencies between written statements and oral testimony can significantly impact an applicant's case. Immigration judges regularly evaluate whether an applicant's account is consistent, detailed, and plausible when determining credibility.
For asylum claims based on gang violence, applicants must typically demonstrate that they were targeted for reasons beyond general criminal activity. This can include showing they were persecuted because of their perceived political opinion, membership in a particular social group, or other protected characteristics.
Withholding of removal provides protection similar to asylum but requires a higher standard of proof, requiring applicants to show it is more likely than not they would face persecution if returned to their home country. CAT protection prevents removal to countries where individuals would more likely than not face torture.
The Third Circuit's denial of the petition for review means Mejia Romero has exhausted her appeals within the federal court system regarding her immigration case. The decision affirms the lower courts' determinations that her applications did not meet the legal standards for the relief she sought.
Immigration attorneys note that cases involving gang violence from Central America face particular challenges in meeting asylum standards, especially when credibility issues arise during proceedings. The requirement to establish persecution based on protected characteristics, rather than general criminal activity, creates additional hurdles for applicants.
The case was assigned Agency No. A202-177-777 within the immigration court system and bears Third Circuit case number 25-1363. The petition was submitted to the appeals court on Jan. 12 and decided nine days later, reflecting the court's typical timeline for immigration appeals.
Mejia Romero's case adds to the substantial volume of immigration appeals processed by federal circuit courts nationwide, as individuals continue seeking judicial review of adverse immigration decisions through the federal court system.