decision will not be reversed unless the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that reached by the BIA. See Chen, 470 F.3d at 1134. Segovia has failed to produce sufficient evidence of a well-founded fear of future persecution based on his membership in a particular social group, and, therefore, is not entitled to relief. E.g., Tesfamichael v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 109, 113 (5th Cir.2006). The suggested groups his claims are based upon are too general to comprise particular social groups for immigration purposes. Mwembie v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 405, 414-15 (5th Cir.2006) (noting that to establish membership of particular social group, applicant must show member of group sharing common immutable characteristic); see also Sanchez-Trujillo v. INS, 801 F.2d 1571, 1576-77 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); In re A-M-E & J-G-U-, 24 I. & N. Dec. 69, 74
holding that a district of columbia consumer protection statute that authorized representative actions and did not reference class action requirements or mandate class certification was a separate and distinct procedural vehicle from a class action and thus did not constitute a class action under cafa holding class of young working class urban males too allencompassing to meet requirements of particular social group recognizing a narrow class of cases in which the termination of the class representatives claim for relief does not moot the claims of the class members holding that government informants are not members of a particular social group holding that government material witnesses do not constitute a particular social group