AMAYA v. ROSEN

Holding that, regardless of whether Chevron deference applied to the BIA's analysis, Petitioner's proposed particular social group of “former Salvadoran MS-13 members" satisfied the particularity requirement and the BIA's interpretation of the particularity requirement in Matter of W-G-R-, 26 I&N Dec. 208 (BIA 2014) (ruling that former gang membership must be further defined with respect to the duration or strength of participation to qualify as a PSG) was erroneous. The Court upheld the denial of CAT relief. Judge Richardson dissented, determining that Chevron deference applied and the BIA's finding of no particularity was reasonable.

Date of Decision
Published