FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 11 2022 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ALBA NOEMI TOBAR-DE ESTEBAN; No. 18-71020 et al., Agency Nos. A208-565-022 Petitioners, A208-565-023 A208-565-024 v. A208-565-025 MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, MEMORANDUM* Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 8, 2022** San Francisco, California Before: WARDLAW, IKUTA, and BADE, Circuit Judges. Alba Noemi Tobar-De Esteban seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) denying her claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the * 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). Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Because the BIA adopted and affirmed the decision of the IJ without opinion, we review the decision of the IJ as if it were the BIA’s. Kwong v. Holder, 671 F.3d 872, 876 (9th Cir. 2011). We uphold the agency’s denial of Tobar-De Esteban’s claim for asylum under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Tobar-De Esteban did not suffer past mistreatment rising to the level of persecution. Under our precedent, the mistreatment she identified — that three armed gang members confronted her minor son, demanded money, and threatened to kill his family if he reported the encounter; that she received a note demanding $300 (which she paid), and that her car was vandalized— does not compel the conclusion that she suffered persecution. See, e.g., Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 932–33, 936 (9th Cir. 2000) (holding that a petitioner did not suffer persecution when he appeared on an organization’s “death list” and received multiple death threats); Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339–40 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that the record did not compel the conclusion that a petitioner suffered past persecution when assailants threw rocks at his house, attempted to steal his property, detained him at gunpoint, held him in a police station jail cell for four to six hours, and beat him). Because Tobar-De Esteban did not testify that the gang 2 threatened or confronted her in any way after she paid the gang’s demand, she did not flee “in the face of an immediate threat.” See Mendoza-Pablo v. Holder, 667 F.3d 1308, 1314 (9th Cir. 2012). We reject Tobar-De Esteban’s contention that the IJ was required to attribute the mistreatment of Tobar-De Esteban’s family members to her for purposes of her claim of past persecution. “[A]lthough harm to a petitioner’s close relatives, friends, or associates may contribute to a successful showing of past persecution,” a petitioner must show that these events “were part of a pattern of persecution closely tied to [the petitioner].” Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1060 (9th …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals