Case Summary
**Case Summary: Edin Avendano-Hernandez v. Eric Holder, Jr.**
**Docket Number:** 2639847
**Court:** U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
**Date:** [Insert Date of Decision]
**Background:**
Edin Avendano-Hernandez, a citizen of Guatemala, sought relief from removal after being ordered by an immigration judge (IJ) to leave the United States. Avendano-Hernandez claimed eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), arguing that he had a well-founded fear of persecution due to his political opinions and past threats in Guatemala.
**Facts:**
Avendano-Hernandez testified that he had been a member of a political group that opposed local government practices. He described instances of intimidation and threats from local authorities which led him to flee to the United States. The IJ found that although Avendano-Hernandez’s testimony was credible, he had not established either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. The IJ also determined that Avendano-Hernandez was not entitled to CAT protection because he failed to demonstrate that he would be tortured if returned to Guatemala.
**Issues on Appeal:**
1. Whether the IJ applied the correct legal standard in assessing the credibility of Avendano-Hernandez’s fear of persecution.
2. Whether the evidence presented supported Avendano-Hernandez's claims for relief under asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT.
**Decision:**
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the IJ's decision for abuse of discretion and upheld the lower court's ruling. The panel concluded that the IJ correctly assessed the credibility of Avendano-Hernandez's claims and that the evidence did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution. The court noted that mere threats or intimidation without significant harm did not constitute past persecution. Furthermore, the court ruled that the IJ's denial of CAT protection was also justified, as Avendano-Hernandez failed to show he would more likely than not be tortured upon returning to Guatemala.
**Conclusion:**
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the IJ's decision to deny asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection to Edin Avendano-Hernandez, concluding that he did not meet the necessary legal standards for relief from removal. As such, the removal order was upheld.
**Significance:**
This case underscores the rigorous standards required for establishing eligibility for asylum and related protections. It illustrates the importance of presenting compelling evidence of both past persecution and the likelihood of future harm in claims for asylum.