Holding that particular social group of “Honduran male[s] who reported to the police drug cartel activity, but the police failed to take action” because it lacks particularity and social distinction, and denying CAT claim based on substantial evidence. Also noting in a footnote that, despite no clear Fourth Circuit authority on point, when the BIA finds no clear error in an IJ decision, that is sufficient to incorporate the IJ decision and thus trigger our review of both decisions. Dissent by Chief Judge Gregory would have vacated the BIA’s decision on the CAT claim because it did not clearly adopt the IJ’s decision and did not sufficiently analyze the evidence in support of the CAT claim on its own.
Date of Decision
Unpublished
