NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 19 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DULCE MARIA GARCIA VALDEZ, No. 18-72155 Petitioner, Agency No. A208-118-305 v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, MEMORANDUM* Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 15, 2019** Before: SCHRODER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges. Dulce Maria Garcia Valdez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that the harm Garcia Valdez suffered in Mexico did not rise to the level of persecution. See Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 936 (9th Cir. 2000) (“Threats standing alone . . . constitute past persecution in only a small category of cases, and only when the threats are so menacing as to cause significant actual suffering or harm.” (quotation and citation omitted)). Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s determination that Garcia Valdez failed to establish an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative”). Thus, Garcia Valdez’s asylum claim fails. In this case, because Garcia Valdez failed to establish eligibility for asylum, she failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006). In her opening brief, Garcia Valdez fails to challenge the agency’s denial of CAT relief; thus, it is waived. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 2 18-72155 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 18-72155 18-72155 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Dulce Garcia Valdez v. William Barr 19 July 2019 Agency Unpublished 28e283035c02497b3ae0cc7cc3e8a3c53d046154
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals