NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 31 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DAMILA SUAREZ RODRIGUEZ, No. 20-70945 Petitioner, Agency No. A212-379-045 v. MEMORANDUM * 0F MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted May 20, 2022 Pasadena, California Before: LEE and BRESS, Circuit Judges, and FITZWATER,** District Judge. 1F Damila de la Caridad Suarez Rodriguez (Suarez), a citizen of Cuba, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision dismissing her appeal of an Immigration Judge (IJ) order denying her requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review the * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation. agency’s legal conclusions and IJ’s alleged due process violations de novo. Garcia v. Wilkinson, 988 F.3d 1136, 1142 (9th Cir. 2021); Castillo-Perez v. INS, 212 F.3d 518, 523 (9th Cir. 2000). We review factual findings for substantial evidence and may grant relief only if the record compels a contrary conclusion. Garcia, 988 F.3d at 1142. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny the petition. 1. Substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum and withholding of removal. “To be eligible for asylum, a petitioner has the burden to demonstrate a likelihood of ‘persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.’” Sharma v. Garland, 9 F.4th 1052, 1059 (9th Cir. 2021) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A)). “To be eligible for withholding of removal, the petitioner must discharge this burden by a clear probability.” Id. (quotation omitted). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Suarez did not show she had been persecuted in Cuba because of her political opinion. “Persecution is an extreme concept that means something considerably more than discrimination or harassment.” Donchev v. Mukasey, 553 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2009) (quotation omitted). Suarez points to derogatory comments and other difficulties she encountered as a child at school, which were allegedly based on her politically active grandmother who disappeared when Suarez was only several months old. But Suarez was able to complete her schooling despite the negative situation at school. 2 And although Suarez, her mother, and her sister were later harassed by the police, they were never “arrested, called in for questioning by the police, or physically harmed.” “We have repeatedly denied petitions for review when, among other factors, the record did not demonstrate significant physical harm.” Sharma, 9 F.4th at 1061. Given the lack of physical harm and lack of information that Suarez put forward about her grandmother, the record does not compel a finding of past persecution. Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that there was no …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals