Dec. 211, 232, 1985 WL 56042 (BIA 1985), that a family may qualify as a “social group” under § 1101: [Persecution that is directed toward an individual who is a member of a group of persons all of whom share a common, immutable characteristic ... such as sex, color, or kinship ties, ... [will only qualify under § 1101 when] the common characteristic that defines the group [is] one that the members of the group either cannot change, or should not be required to change because it is fundamental to their individual identities or consciences. (emphasis added). As lucidly explained in Hernandez-Montiel v. INS, 225 F.3d 1084, 1092 (9th Cir.2000), the First, Third, and Seventh Circuits have adopted Acosta’s immutability analysis. See Ananeh-Firempong v. INS, 766 F.2d 621, 626 (1st Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); Fatin [v. INS ], 12 F.3d [1233, 1239-41 (3d
holding that the family court is required to consider all relevant factors in determining alimony holding that evidence of the scope of a particular claim can be found on review of other claims recognizing that creditor has burden of determining the accuracy of scheduling claims in determining whether filing proof of claim is necessary holding family court has wide discretion in determining how marital property is to be distributed recognizing acosta in determining that family relations can be the basis of a particular social group