United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
No. 25-1448
CLARIXA MALDONADO-RUIZ,
Petitioner,
v.
PAMELA J. BONDI, Attorney General,
Respondent.
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS
Before
Aframe, Lynch, and Dunlap, Circuit Judges.
Kristian R. Meyer, Kevin P. MacMurray, and MacMurray & Associates on brief for petitioner.
Monica G. Antoun, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Brett A. Shumate, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, on brief for respondent.
March 10, 2026 LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Clarixa Oneyda Maldonado Ruiz,
who is a native and citizen of Honduras and who entered the United
States without inspection over a dozen years ago, petitions for
review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA")
dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial
of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal, based
largely on her testimony that she is bisexual. See 8 U.S.C.
§§ 1158(b)(1)(A), 1231(b)(3)(A). We deny the petition because she
has shown neither past persecution nor a nexus to her claimed
particular social groups ("PSGs"), and has not established that
the Honduran government would be unwilling or unable to protect
her from private actors. We have no need to reach the issue of
whether her claimed PSGs are viable, and so we do not do so.
I.
A.
Maldonado-Ruiz entered the United States without
inspection on or about March 12, 2012, at or near Hidalgo, Texas.
On August 1, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security filed a
Notice to Appear charging her with removability pursuant to
§ 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Maldonado-Ruiz, through counsel, conceded that she was removable
and filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). On
April 4, 2022, she testified at a merits hearing before the IJ and
- 2 - also relied on her July 22, 2021, written declaration and certain
documentary evidence previously submitted to the IJ.1
Maldonado-Ruiz was born in 1982 in Tela, Honduras. When
she was five years old, her family moved within Honduras to San
Cristóbal. She did not know her father until age seven. During
her childhood, he lived in the United States and periodically
returned to Honduras and stayed at her family's home. Then, he
came to the home drunk, argued with her mother, and at times forced
the family out of the house. He once attempted to throw a
television at her mother and, on another occasion, choked her
sister. When Maldonado-Ruiz was eight or nine years old, her
father struck her back with the metal part of a belt, as punishment
for jumping on a bed.2 No report was made to the police.
Around age nine, Maldonado-Ruiz witnessed a neighbor
shoot and kill Maldonado-Ruiz's brother-in-law when the brother-
in-law confronted the neighbor. Maldonado-Ruiz stated that the
1 Maldonado-Ruiz submitted country conditions materials to the IJ, including reports from the U.S. State Department, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and other sources describing discrimination and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex ("LGBTI") persons in Honduras, including attacks by gangs, police, and members of the public, as well as killings of activists. The materials also relate that Honduran law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and includes enhanced penalties for crimes committed on those grounds, though prosecutions appear to be rare. 2 Although Maldonado-Ruiz's written declaration places the belt-striking at a different age than her hearing testimony, the IJ's findings reflect the hearing testimony on this point.
- 3 - neighbor had been stalking and harassing her family at their San
Cristóbal home. The family filed a complaint with police. No
arrest was made. The family returned to Tela after the shooting.
Maldonado-Ruiz testified that she identifies as bisexual
and that bisexuality is common but not accepted in Honduras. At
age twenty-two, she began a two-year romantic relationship with a
woman named Nelly. Because they went out publicly as a couple,
Maldonado-Ruiz believed that others in the community were aware of
the relationship. Some people called her and Nelly "marimacha,"
which Maldonado-Ruiz understood to be a derogatory term for women
who are attracted to women. Maldonado-Ruiz was not physically
harmed or threatened by those who used that term.
In 2009, Maldonado-Ruiz discovered that her house had
been broken into and valuables stolen. She reported the burglary
to police, who prepared a written report reflecting her suspicion
that a neighbor was the robber and did not investigate further or
identify a suspect. Two years later, Maldonado-Ruiz witnessed two
men fatally shoot a young man in the street. She did not know the
victim or the perpetrators and does not assert that she reported
the incident to police. She said she was hospitalized in Honduras
for shock.
In 2011, a man whom Maldonado-Ruiz did not know or
recognize began following her, but she recalled few details. On
one occasion, while she was walking near her house, the man stood
- 4 - in front of her at an unspecified distance, called her "trash,"
"ugly," and "bitch," moved as if to strike her but did not do so,
and said, "bitch, I will kill you." The man did not mention her
sexuality or Nelly. The encounter ended without physical harm to
Maldonado-Ruiz. She believed the threat was related to her
attraction to women. She did not report the incident to police
because, in her view, Honduran authorities do not believe in
justice. Maldonado-Ruiz saw the man once more on a later date; he
stared at her but did not speak. In late 2011, she received
threatening text messages from an unidentified sender, which she
believed were from that man. She did not describe the content of
the messages or explain the basis for her belief.
Maldonado-Ruiz left Honduras in 2012 and came to the
United States. In 2014, she married a man, Edwin Escobar, who is
also undocumented, and she remains married to him today. They
have one child together.3 She testified that she continues to
identify as bisexual and respects her marriage, would continue to
respect her marriage if returned to Honduras, and would not pursue
a relationship with a woman unless the marriage were to end.4 In
3 Maldonado-Ruiz has another child, born in Honduras in 2006, from a prior relationship with a different man. 4 Maldonado-Ruiz was arrested in 2019 after she allegedly struck her husband three times with a baseball bat. The charges were later dismissed.
- 5 - the United States, she has received therapy and has been diagnosed
with post-traumatic stress disorder ("PTSD").
B.
On April 13, 2022, the IJ issued a written decision
denying Maldonado-Ruiz's applications and ordering her removed to
Honduras. The IJ generally found her testimony credible but
insufficient to establish her claims. The IJ denied asylum because
Maldonado-Ruiz had failed to establish (1) that the harm she
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
No. 25-1448
CLARIXA MALDONADO-RUIZ,
Petitioner,
v.
PAMELA J. BONDI, Attorney General,
Respondent.
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS
Before
Aframe, Lynch, and Dunlap, Circuit Judges.
Kristian R. Meyer, Kevin P. MacMurray, and MacMurray & Associates on brief for petitioner.
Monica G. Antoun, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Brett A. Shumate, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, on brief for respondent.
March 10, 2026 LYNCH, Circuit Judge. Clarixa Oneyda Maldonado Ruiz,
who is a native and citizen of Honduras and who entered the United
States without inspection over a dozen years ago, petitions for
review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA")
dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge's ("IJ") denial
of her applications for asylum and withholding of removal, based
largely on her testimony that she is bisexual. See 8 U.S.C.
§§ 1158(b)(1)(A), 1231(b)(3)(A). We deny the petition because she
has shown neither past persecution nor a nexus to her claimed
particular social groups ("PSGs"), and has not established that
the Honduran government would be unwilling or unable to protect
her from private actors. We have no need to reach the issue of
whether her claimed PSGs are viable, and so we do not do so.
I.
A.
Maldonado-Ruiz entered the United States without
inspection on or about March 12, 2012, at or near Hidalgo, Texas.
On August 1, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security filed a
Notice to Appear charging her with removability pursuant to
§ 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Maldonado-Ruiz, through counsel, conceded that she was removable
and filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). On
April 4, 2022, she testified at a merits hearing before the IJ and
- 2 - also relied on her July 22, 2021, written declaration and certain
documentary evidence previously submitted to the IJ.1
Maldonado-Ruiz was born in 1982 in Tela, Honduras. When
she was five years old, her family moved within Honduras to San
Cristóbal. She did not know her father until age seven. During
her childhood, he lived in the United States and periodically
returned to Honduras and stayed at her family's home. Then, he
came to the home drunk, argued with her mother, and at times forced
the family out of the house. He once attempted to throw a
television at her mother and, on another occasion, choked her
sister. When Maldonado-Ruiz was eight or nine years old, her
father struck her back with the metal part of a belt, as punishment
for jumping on a bed.2 No report was made to the police.
Around age nine, Maldonado-Ruiz witnessed a neighbor
shoot and kill Maldonado-Ruiz's brother-in-law when the brother-
in-law confronted the neighbor. Maldonado-Ruiz stated that the
1 Maldonado-Ruiz submitted country conditions materials to the IJ, including reports from the U.S. State Department, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and other sources describing discrimination and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex ("LGBTI") persons in Honduras, including attacks by gangs, police, and members of the public, as well as killings of activists. The materials also relate that Honduran law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and includes enhanced penalties for crimes committed on those grounds, though prosecutions appear to be rare. 2 Although Maldonado-Ruiz's written declaration places the belt-striking at a different age than her hearing testimony, the IJ's findings reflect the hearing testimony on this point.
- 3 - neighbor had been stalking and harassing her family at their San
Cristóbal home. The family filed a complaint with police. No
arrest was made. The family returned to Tela after the shooting.
Maldonado-Ruiz testified that she identifies as bisexual
and that bisexuality is common but not accepted in Honduras. At
age twenty-two, she began a two-year romantic relationship with a
woman named Nelly. Because they went out publicly as a couple,
Maldonado-Ruiz believed that others in the community were aware of
the relationship. Some people called her and Nelly "marimacha,"
which Maldonado-Ruiz understood to be a derogatory term for women
who are attracted to women. Maldonado-Ruiz was not physically
harmed or threatened by those who used that term.
In 2009, Maldonado-Ruiz discovered that her house had
been broken into and valuables stolen. She reported the burglary
to police, who prepared a written report reflecting her suspicion
that a neighbor was the robber and did not investigate further or
identify a suspect. Two years later, Maldonado-Ruiz witnessed two
men fatally shoot a young man in the street. She did not know the
victim or the perpetrators and does not assert that she reported
the incident to police. She said she was hospitalized in Honduras
for shock.
In 2011, a man whom Maldonado-Ruiz did not know or
recognize began following her, but she recalled few details. On
one occasion, while she was walking near her house, the man stood
- 4 - in front of her at an unspecified distance, called her "trash,"
"ugly," and "bitch," moved as if to strike her but did not do so,
and said, "bitch, I will kill you." The man did not mention her
sexuality or Nelly. The encounter ended without physical harm to
Maldonado-Ruiz. She believed the threat was related to her
attraction to women. She did not report the incident to police
because, in her view, Honduran authorities do not believe in
justice. Maldonado-Ruiz saw the man once more on a later date; he
stared at her but did not speak. In late 2011, she received
threatening text messages from an unidentified sender, which she
believed were from that man. She did not describe the content of
the messages or explain the basis for her belief.
Maldonado-Ruiz left Honduras in 2012 and came to the
United States. In 2014, she married a man, Edwin Escobar, who is
also undocumented, and she remains married to him today. They
have one child together.3 She testified that she continues to
identify as bisexual and respects her marriage, would continue to
respect her marriage if returned to Honduras, and would not pursue
a relationship with a woman unless the marriage were to end.4 In
3 Maldonado-Ruiz has another child, born in Honduras in 2006, from a prior relationship with a different man. 4 Maldonado-Ruiz was arrested in 2019 after she allegedly struck her husband three times with a baseball bat. The charges were later dismissed.
- 5 - the United States, she has received therapy and has been diagnosed
with post-traumatic stress disorder ("PTSD").
B.
On April 13, 2022, the IJ issued a written decision
denying Maldonado-Ruiz's applications and ordering her removed to
Honduras. The IJ generally found her testimony credible but
insufficient to establish her claims. The IJ denied asylum because
Maldonado-Ruiz had failed to establish (1) that the harm she
described rose to the level of persecution, (2) that her membership
in her proposed PSGs was "one central reason" for any harm she
suffered or feared;5 (3) that the Honduran government was unable
or unwilling to protect her, or (4) that she had a well-founded
fear of future persecution. The IJ emphasized that the principal
incident consisted of a single unfulfilled threat from an unknown
man who did not reference Maldonado-Ruiz's gender, sexual
orientation, or relationship with Nelly, and that the threat was
never reported to police. The IJ also observed that Maldonado-Ruiz
had lived openly as a bisexual woman in Honduras for more than two
years without suffering any physical harm on account of her sexual
5 Maldonado-Ruiz's asylum application asserted that she belonged to the following PSGs: "Honduran Women," "Honduran Sexual Minority," and "Honduran Bi-sexual Women." On appeal, she develops her nexus arguments only as to harm allegedly tied to her sexual orientation. Any argument that she was persecuted on account of her gender, independent of her sexual orientation, is thus waived. See Dor v. Bondi, 161 F.4th 1, 10 n.12 (1st Cir. 2025).
- 6 - orientation or gender. The IJ acknowledged the effect on
Maldonado-Ruiz's mental state of witnessing violence against
others. As to the country conditions materials describing
discrimination against LGBTI persons and uneven enforcement of
laws prohibiting such discrimination, the IJ found that those
materials did not establish that every LGBTI individual in Honduras
generally faces an "objectively reasonable possibility of
persecution." The IJ further determined that Maldonado-Ruiz was
ineligible for withholding of removal, which requires a more
stringent showing than asylum, and also denied CAT protection.
Maldonado-Ruiz timely appealed to the BIA. On April 11,
2025, the BIA dismissed her appeal, affirming her ineligibility
for withholding of removal and holding that the IJ did not clearly
err in finding (1) that the alleged harm did not rise to the level
of persecution, (2) that the alleged harm did not occur on account
of her membership in her proposed PSGs, and (3) that the Honduran
government was not unwilling or unable to protect her. The BIA
further held that she waived any challenge to the denial of CAT
relief.6
Maldonado-Ruiz timely petitioned this court for review.
6 Maldonado-Ruiz has waived any CAT claim on appeal "by failing to properly address in her brief the merits of her claim or challenge the BIA's waiver determination." Cano v. Bondi, 152 F.4th 237, 247-48 (1st Cir. 2025).
- 7 - II.
"Where, as here, the BIA adopts the IJ's decision but
adds its own gloss, we review the decisions of both the BIA and
the IJ together." Martinez v. Bondi, 132 F.4th 74, 78 (1st Cir.
2025) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Figueroa v.
Garland, 119 F.4th 160, 166 (1st Cir. 2024)). We review the
entirety of the agency's determination of past persecution or a
well-founded fear of future persecution -- both the underlying
factual findings and the application of the INA's standard for
persecution to those findings -- using the deferential,
"substantial evidence" standard. Urias-Orellana v. Bondi, No.
24-777, 2026 WL 598435, at *4-5 (U.S. Mar. 4, 2026) (quoting
Nasrallah v. Barr, 590 U.S. 573, 584 (2020)). As the Supreme Court
has held, substantial evidence "means -- and means only -- such
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion." Id. at *4 (internal quotation marks
omitted) (quoting Biestek v. Berryhill, 587 U.S. 97, 103 (2019)).
The agency's persecution determination is thus "conclusive unless
any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the
contrary." Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Nasrallah, 590 U.S. at
584).
To qualify for asylum, Maldonado-Ruiz must show she
meets the INA's definition of a "refugee," meaning that she is
- 8 - "unable or unwilling to return to" her country of nationality
because of "persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on
account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a [PSG], or
political opinion." 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A); see also 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.13(a)-(b); Urias-Orellana, 2026 WL 598435, at *2.
"Establishing persecution requires proof of three discrete
elements: a threshold level of past or anticipated serious harm,
a nexus between that harm and government action or inaction, and
a causal connection to one of the five statutorily protected
grounds." Ramos-Hernandez v. Bondi, 163 F.4th 44, 51 (1st Cir.
2025) (quoting Esteban-Garcia v. Garland, 94 F.4th 186, 191 (1st
Cir. 2024)).
"Persecution transcends 'unpleasantness, harassment,
and . . . basic suffering,'" and even credible threats must be "so
menacing as to cause significant actual suffering or harm."
Urias-Orellana v. Garland, 121 F.4th 327, 335 (1st Cir. 2024)
(quoting Santos Garcia v. Garland, 67 F.4th 455, 461 (1st Cir.
2023)), aff'd sub nom. Urias-Orellana, 2026 WL 598435 (U.S. Mar. 4,
2026). Where the alleged harm is inflicted by private actors, the
applicant must show the government is "unwilling or unable" to
control that conduct. Castano v. Bondi, 160 F.4th 226, 232 (1st
Cir. 2025) (quoting Khan v. Holder, 727 F.3d 1, 7 (1st Cir. 2013)).
And the applicant must provide "sufficient evidence of an actual
connection" between the harm and a protected trait; where the
- 9 - evidence shows multiple motives, a protected ground must be "at
least one central reason." De La Cruz-Quispe v. Bondi, 161 F.4th
17, 24 (1st Cir. 2025) (quoting Esteban-Garcia, 94 F.4th at 192).
An inability to establish any one of these three elements
defeats the asylum claim. See Ramos-Hernandez, 163 F.4th at 51.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA's determination
that the IJ did not clearly err in finding that Maldonado-Ruiz did
not suffer past persecution. During her childhood, her father
struck her once with a belt, she witnessed his mistreatment of
other family members, and she saw a neighbor fatally shoot her
brother-in-law. Years later, as an adult, she witnessed a public
shooting, received a single unfulfilled threat from an unknown
man, and was subjected to derogatory name-calling by some
townspeople. See Escobar v. Holder, 698 F.3d 36, 38 (1st Cir.
2012) (holding "[e]vidence of 'widespread violence . . . affecting
all citizens' is not enough to establish persecution on a protected
ground" (omission in original) (quoting Maryam v. Gonzales, 421
F.3d 60, 63 (1st Cir. 2005))). The harm in this case is less
severe than in other cases in which we found no persecution. See,
e.g., Vargas-Salazar v. Garland, 119 F.4th 167, 170-73 (1st Cir.
2024) (multiple death threats and physical assault did not compel
- 10 - persecution finding); Santos Garcia, 67 F.4th at 459-61 (three
threats and a beating by armed assailants insufficient).
Maldonado-Ruiz contends that the agency failed to
consider the cumulative effect of her mistreatment in Honduras and
overlooked both her mental health diagnoses and the Honduras
country conditions evidence. These arguments misstate the record.
The IJ expressly considered and weighed the evidence she describes,
and the BIA affirmed those findings.7
Substantial evidence likewise supports the BIA's
determination that the IJ did not clearly err in finding that
Maldonado-Ruiz failed to establish the required nexus, including
under a mixed motive theory. Her nexus argument focuses on the
unknown man's threat, which she contends was centrally motivated
by hostility toward her sexual orientation. As the IJ pointed
out, no reference was made at all toward her sexuality or her
female partner, and her subjective belief is insufficient to
establish nexus. See Ruiz-Escobar v. Sessions, 881 F.3d 252, 259-
60 (1st Cir. 2018). Evidence that Maldonado-Ruiz's sexual
orientation was generally known in the community, or that
discrimination against sexual minorities exists in Honduras, does
7The findings of no past persecution and no nexus are not undermined by Maldonado-Ruiz's PTSD diagnosis. And even assuming, as her brief asserts, she has also been diagnosed with recurrent moderate major depressive disorder relating to her experiences in Honduras, that diagnosis does not alter our analysis.
- 11 - not compel a contrary conclusion. See, e.g., Espinoza-Ochoa v.
Garland, 89 F.4th 222, 237 (1st Cir. 2023) ("[P]ersonal disputes
are generally not enough to show the required nexus." (alteration
in original) (quoting Barnica-Lopez v. Garland, 59 F.4th 520, 531
(1st Cir. 2023))).
Having failed to show past persecution, Maldonado-Ruiz
was required to independently establish a well-founded fear of
future persecution that is "both subjectively genuine and
objectively reasonable." Esteban-Garcia, 94 F.4th at 191 (quoting
Sunarto Ang v. Holder, 723 F.3d 6, 10-11 (1st Cir. 2013)). The IJ
assumed a subjectively genuine fear but found it not objectively
reasonable. Where, as here, the feared harm would be inflicted by
private actors, the applicant must show either government
"acquiescence in the persecutor's acts" or an "inability or
unwillingness to investigate and punish those acts." Gómez-Medina
v. Barr, 975 F.3d 27, 32 (1st Cir. 2020) (quoting Ortiz-Araniba v.
Keisler, 505 F.3d 39, 42 (1st Cir. 2007)). Substantial evidence
supports the agency's determination that Maldonado-Ruiz also
failed to make that showing. Her argument to us centers on the
police response to (1) her family's complaint after her brother-
in-law's killing in the early 1990s, and (2) her 2009 home burglary
report. The record reflects that in fact police received those
complaints and took reports. Dissatisfaction that the complaints
did not result in arrests or convictions does not show government
- 12 - acquiescence or an inability or unwillingness to investigate or
punish the private acts, particularly where "local authorities
responded immediately to each incident." Id. (quoting Harutyunyan
v. Gonzales, 421 F.3d 64, 68 (1st Cir. 2005)); see also
Alvizures-Gomes v. Lynch, 830 F.3d 49, 55 (1st Cir. 2016). Nor do
the two earlier, unsolved incidents -- separated by nearly two
decades -- demonstrate that reporting the 2011 threat would have
been futile. See Castano, 160 F.4th at 232-34. The agency
expressly considered the country conditions reports describing
police corruption and evidence of some violence against LGBTI
persons, and found the record did not show that conditions for
sexual minorities in Honduras had worsened since the period when
Maldonado-Ruiz lived openly as a bisexual woman in a same-sex
relationship without experiencing anything more than ordinary
harassment or mistreatment. See Cortez-Mejia v. Garland, 121 F.4th
938, 943-44 (1st Cir. 2024). The 2011 threat, moreover, was not
shown to be motivated by her sexual orientation.8
Maldonado-Ruiz does not contest that if she has not
proven her case for asylum, her claim of withholding of removal
fails as well. See De La Cruz-Quispe, 161 F.4th at 24-25.
8For largely the same reasons, substantial evidence supports the agency's determination that Maldonado-Ruiz failed to show the Honduran government was unable or unwilling to protect her from past harm inflicted by private actors, independently defeating any claim of past persecution on that ground.
- 13 - III.
The petition for review is denied.
- 14 -