Azucena Guillen-Lara v. Jefferson Sessions

Case: 17-60555 Document: 00514701572 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/29/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 17-60555 October 29, 2018 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk AZUCENA ELIZABETH GUILLEN-LARA; JESSIKA JULIANNE MARAVILLA-GUILLEN; MANUEL ARMANDO MARAVILLA JURADO, also known as Manolo,

Petitioners - Appellants v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent - Appellee

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 891 795 BIA No. A206 891 796 BIA No. A206 891 797

Before BARKSDALE, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Azucena Elizabeth Guillen-Lara, Manuel Armando Maravilla Jurado, and Jessika Julianne Maravilla-Guillen, natives and citizens of El Salvador, and proceeding pro se, petition for review of a final order of the Board of

• • Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Case: 17-60555 Document: 00514701572 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/29/2018

No. 17-60555

Immigration Appeals dismissing their appeal of an order of an immigration judge denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Contrary to briefing rules, petitioners’ brief does not provide any citations to the parts of the record on which they rely. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A); 5th Cir. R. 28.2.2. Although pro se litigants enjoy the benefit of liberal construction, Yang v. Holder, 664 F.3d 580, 589 (5th Cir. 2011), they “must abide by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure”. United States v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994). Additionally, petitioners have abandoned their asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT claims by offering nothing more than conclusory assertions in support. See Garrido-Morato v. Gonzales, 485 F.3d 319, 321 n.1 (5th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted); see also Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224–25 (5th Cir. 1993) (to preserve a claim on appeal it must be adequately briefed). DENIED.