Case Summary
**Case Summary: Pacheco Fregozo v. Mukasey, Docket Number 7850658**
**Court**: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
**Decided**: 2008
**Background**: This case involves Petitioner Juan Pacheco Fregozo, a native and citizen of Mexico, who sought review of a decision made by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) regarding his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
**Facts**: Pacheco Fregozo entered the United States illegally and subsequently applied for asylum in 2003, claiming a fear of persecution based on his membership in a particular social group. He contended that he faced threats from drug cartels in Mexico due to his family's involvement in law enforcement and the family's opposition to criminal activities.
**Legal Issues**: The key legal issues included whether Pacheco Fregozo was eligible for asylum based on his claimed fear of persecution and whether the threats posed by the drug cartels constituted a basis for legal relief under U.S. immigration law.
**Holding**: The Ninth Circuit upheld the BIA's decision to deny asylum, finding that Pacheco Fregozo failed to demonstrate the likelihood of past or future persecution. The court emphasized that mere threats from non-governmental actors, such as drug cartels, did not automatically qualify as persecution unless the government was unable or unwilling to control those actors.
**Rationale**: The court noted that Pacheco Fregozo had not shown adequate evidence that the Mexican government was incapable of protecting him from potential harm or that he was targeted specifically due to his social group status. Additionally, the court found no error in the BIA's analysis regarding the threshold for demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution.
**Conclusion**: The Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of the BIA, thereby denying Pacheco Fregozo's petitions for asylum and withholding of removal. The ruling underscores the challenges faced by asylum seekers in proving the requisite level of targeted persecution and the necessity for a government’s inability to protect individuals from non-state actors.
**Significance**: This case highlights the complexities of asylum law, particularly in scenarios involving threats from organized crime or gangs, and reinforces the evaluation criteria used by judicial bodies in assessing claims of persecution based on social group membership.