NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 18 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ERIC DANIEL LUCERO REYES, No. 19-70997 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-143-098 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 14, 2020** San Francisco, California Before: FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit Judges, and RAKOFF,*** District Judge. Eric Lucero Reyes petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection * 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 Jed S. Rakoff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation. under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and “review denials of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief for substantial evidence and will uphold a denial supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Silva-Pereira v. Lynch, 827 F.3d 1176, 1184 (9th Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). This standard is deferential, and we reverse the agency only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Sanjaa v. Sessions, 863 F.3d 1161, 1164 (9th Cir. 2017). We deny the petition.1 Petitioner believed that the criminal organization known as La Familia Michoacana (LFM) was targeting members of his family in Chihuahua, Mexico. Between 2010 and 2018, six of Petitioner’s relatives living in Chihuahua died. The circumstances of their deaths were relayed to Petitioner by his mother, who received information from his aunt living in Mexico. Petitioner did not present any evidence, beyond his aunt’s mere speculation, that compels a finding that LFM was responsible for the deaths of his relatives in Chihuahua and killed them on account of their family membership as opposed to on account of personal disputes or random criminal activity. See Pagayon v. Holder, 1 Because we review the BIA’s consideration of the merits of Petitioner’s claims, we need not reach Petitioner’s arguments that the Immigration Judge (IJ) erred in his findings relating to the timeliness of Petitioner’s petition or the IJ’s statement relating to his use of discretion. 2 675 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2011) (“A personal dispute is not, standing alone, tantamount to persecution . . . .”); Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that random criminal acts bore no nexus to a protected ground). As substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Petitioner failed to establish any causal nexus between the harm and Petitioner’s membership in a protected group, Petitioner is not entitled to asylum or withholding of removal. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1015–16 (9th Cir. 2010). Additionally, no record evidence compels a finding that ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals