Case Summary
### Case Summary: Oscar Larin-Dominguez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
**Docket Number:** 7838344
**Court:** United States Court of Appeals
**Judges:** [Names of the judges, if available]
**Date:** [Date of decision, if available]
#### Background:
Oscar Larin-Dominguez, the petitioner, is a native of Mexico who sought relief from removal proceedings initiated by the U.S. government. The case revolves around Larin-Dominguez's application for asylum and his claims for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). He claimed to have a credible fear of persecution due to his political opinions and past mistreatment by authorities in Mexico.
#### Procedural History:
Following an immigration judge's denial of his asylum application and subsequent appeals, Larin-Dominguez petitioned the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) for reconsideration. The BIA affirmed the immigration judge’s ruling, leading Larin-Dominguez to file a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals.
#### Issues:
1. Whether the BIA erred in affirming the immigration judge's decision to deny asylum based on Larin-Dominguez's political opinion.
2. Whether the BIA properly assessed the evidence presented regarding the likelihood of persecution Larin-Dominguez could face if returned to Mexico.
3. The appropriateness of the denial of withholding of removal and protection under CAT.
#### Argument:
Larin-Dominguez argued that the immigration judge failed to adequately consider the evidence of past persecution he experienced and the credible threats he faced from government authorities in Mexico due to his political activities. He also contested that the BIA did not sufficiently account for changing conditions in Mexico that would affect his safety upon return.
#### Decision:
The United States Court of Appeals affirmed the BIA's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the BIA's findings. The court determined that:
- Larin-Dominguez's testimony lacked sufficient corroboration, undermining his claim of past persecution.
- The immigration judge had properly applied the legal standards for assessing credibility and asylum eligibility.
The court also noted that the evidence Larin-Dominguez presented did not demonstrate a clear probability of future persecution or torture. Therefore, claims under withholding of removal and CAT were also properly denied.
#### Conclusion:
The petition for review was denied, upholding the BIA's ruling that Larin-Dominguez did not meet the burden of proof necessary for asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT protection. This case underscores the challenges faced by individuals in asylum applications, particularly in establishing a credible fear of persecution.
#### Notes:
- This summary contains general interpretations of court proceedings and decisions. Always refer to official court documents for exact language and legal determinations.
- Any legal precedent established in this case may influence future immigration proceedings and decisions on asylum.