NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 3 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUAN JOSE SANCHEZ RODRIGUEZ, No. 20-70862 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-907-261 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 15, 2022** San Francisco, California Before: GOULD and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN,*** District Judge. Petitioner Juan Sanchez Rodriguez (“Petitioner”) seeks review of a final order from the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his application for * 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). *** The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation. withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Petitioner claims his life or freedom would be threatened in Mexico on account of his membership in a particular social group and that he would be more likely than not to be tortured if returned to Mexico. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b). We deny the petition We review factual findings related to an applicant’s eligibility for withholding of removal and CAT protection under the substantial evidence standard. INS v. Elias- Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 & n.1 (1992). Petitioner challenges the BIA’s determination that he did not establish a nexus between his claimed persecution— physical harm at the hands of gang members in Mexico—and a protected ground. Petitioner also challenges the BIA’s determination that any past or future harm was not more likely than not to have occurred or to occur with the acquiescence or consent of the government. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s dismissal of Petitioner’s withholding claim on lack-of-nexus grounds. The nexus requirement for a withholding of removal claim is satisfied if the Petitioner proves that a protected ground is “a reason” for the feared persecution. Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 359– 60 (9th Cir. 2017). The BIA properly found that the harm Petitioner fears is attributable to criminal intent rather than his membership in a particular social group. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (noting that the “desire to 2 be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s determination that Petitioner did not qualify for protection under the CAT. To obtain protection under the CAT, the applicant must show that he is more likely than not to be tortured by or at the instigation of the government or with the government’s consent and acquiescence if he is returned to his home country. See Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, 800 F.3d 1072, 1078–79 (9th Cir. 2015). The BIA properly found that any past or future harm suffered …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals