NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 22 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CARMELO HERRERA-HERNANDEZ, No. 15-73080 AKA Carmelo Hernandez-Herrera, Agency No. A095-733-583 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 7, 2019** Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges. Carmelo Herrera-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing Herrera- Hernandez’s appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying Herrera- Hernandez’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief 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). Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition. We review de novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), and we review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). The BIA did not err in finding that Herrera-Hernandez did not establish membership in a cognizable social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))); see also Barbosa v. Barr, 919 F.3d 1169, 1175 (9th Cir. 2019) (applying case law in which similar social groups were proposed and finding that individuals returning to Mexico from the United States who are believed to be wealthy does not constitute a particular social group). Thus, Herrera-Hernandez’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. Herrera-Hernandez does not challenge the agency’s denial of CAT relief, so that issue is waived. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 15-73080 15-73080 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Carmelo Herrera-Hernandez v. William Barr 22 August 2019 Agency Unpublished 5f9fcdbe968455a9e7e6d029df99097f56f3f6e5
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals