NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 10 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JULIO CESAR RUIZ -ARCINIEGA, No. 17-73337 Petitioner, Agency No. A078-081-951 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 8, 2021** Seattle, Washington Before: GOULD, TALLMAN, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges. Julio Cesar Ruiz-Arciniega (“Ruiz”) petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decisions denying relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) and denying his motion to reopen proceedings. We review the denial of CAT relief for substantial evidence. Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 940, 944 (9th Cir. 2007). We review the denial of a motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. Najmabadi v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition. 1. The BIA’s denial of Ruiz’s CAT application is supported by substantial evidence. “[R]elief under the Convention Against Torture requires a two part analysis—first, is it more likely than not that the alien will be tortured upon return to his homeland; and second, is there sufficient state action involved in that torture.” Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033 (9th Cir. 2014) (simplified). The agency found that Ruiz failed to satisfy the required CAT elements. First, the agency found that Ruiz failed to show that it is more likely than not he will be tortured if removed to Mexico. Ruiz’s claim relies on the premise that a former coworker, Jesus Bernal, seeks violent revenge for a dispute that occurred in 2007. Yet, Ruiz concedes that neither Bernal, nor any of his associates, have communicated with or threatened Ruiz since 2007. In his CAT proceedings, Ruiz presented no evidence that Bernal has attempted to threaten him or his family since Bernal was removed from the United States. As the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) stated, “[t]he evidence of record does not indicate in any way that Jesus Bernal, his associates . . . or the Sinaloa cartel . . . have any interest in harming him whatsoever.” The BIA similarly determined that Ruiz’s testimony, “string[s] together a series of 2 suppositions to show that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured by his coworkers.” The record does not compel a contrary finding. See id. at 1031. Second, Ruiz failed to show that the Mexican government would consent or acquiesce to his torture. Ruiz’s only specific evidence on this element is that police officers in his hometown did not intervene when they saw Bernal and other gang members driving around in pickup trucks carrying firearms. Ruiz argues that this lack of “police interference” supports a connection between Bernal …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals