NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OSCAR AREVALO-JAIMES, AKA Oscar No. 16-71372 Arevalo, Agency No. A090-497-353 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 13, 2018** Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Oscar Arevalo-Jaimes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction * 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). under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Arevalo- Jaimes failed to establish that any harm he fears in Mexico would be on account of his family membership or any other protected ground. See Ayala, 640 F.3d at 1097 (even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such group” (emphasis in original)); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Arevalo-Jaimes’ withholding of removal claim fails. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Arevalo-Jaimes’ CAT claim because he failed to establish it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010) (generalized evidence of violence and crime in Mexico is not particular to petitioner and is insufficient to meet the CAT standard). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 16-71372 16-71372 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Oscar Arevalo-Jaimes v. Jefferson Sessions 19 March 2018 Agency Unpublished e798df9cb0eb827d6057ec02856fcbc5f85bef85
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals