NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 17 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE ALFREDO ESCOBAR VALENCIA, No. 18-70892 AKA Alfredo Escobar, Agency No. A095-135-975 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 13, 2019** San Francisco, California Before: GOULD and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and PEARSON,*** District Judge. Jose Alfredo Escobar Valencia (“Escobar”), a native and citizen of El Salvador, seeks asylum, withholding of removal, and protection 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). *** The Honorable Benita Y. Pearson, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation. Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) granted Escobar relief on all three grounds, but the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) reversed, giving relief on none. Escobar petitioned our court for review. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. 1. The BIA denied Escobar’s application for asylum and withholding of removal on the grounds that he did not demonstrate past persecution or a well- founded fear of future persecution. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determinations. See Ling Huang v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1149, 1152 (9th Cir. 2014) (denials of claims of asylum and withholding of removal reviewed for substantial evidence). As to past persecution, Escobar contends that he was “beaten many times as a teenager” in El Salvador. But as the BIA found and as the record supports, there is no evidence concerning the severity or the frequency of the beatings. Escobar was unable to detail a single incident when asked. Escobar’s conclusory testimony does not compel a finding of past persecution. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1059–60 (9th Cir. 2009) (being beaten by youths, robbed of sandals and money, and accosted by a threatening mob did not compel a finding of past persecution); Gu v. Gonzales, 454 F.3d 1014, 1017–18, 1020 (9th Cir. 2004) (applicant who was beaten ten times with a rubber pipe and detained three days by Chinese police due to unsanctioned religious practices did not establish past 2 persecution); Prasad v. INS, 47 F.3d 336, 339–40 (9th Cir. 1995) (a reasonable fact finder would not be compelled to find past persecution when the applicant was stopped at a road block, arrested, beaten, and detained for several hours but when he did not require medical treatment and there was no evidence that the government had a continuing interest in the applicant). Escobar also urges that “[g]ang members killed his father and brother” because they were police officers, showing past persecution. As an initial matter, Escobar’s father died of natural causes. As to the brother, Escobar speculated that gang members killed his brother because ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals