FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 14 2021 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARIANO CALDERON ORTUNO, No. 18-73304 Petitioner, Agency No. A071-644-040 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 12, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER and BADE, Circuit Judges, and JACK,*** District Judge. Mariano Calderon Ortuno, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming 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 Janis Graham Jack, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation. order of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Ortuno’s claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“Torture Convention”) and ordering him removed to Mexico. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the agency’s factual determinations for substantial evidence, which means that we uphold those determinations “unless the evidence in the record compels a contrary conclusion,” and we review questions of law de novo. Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 769-70 (9th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). We deny the petition. 1. A petitioner claiming asylum bears the burden to show a “well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(42)(A), 1158(b)(1). For withholding of removal, a petitioner must show a “clear probability of persecution” based on a protected ground. INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Under this standard, the protected ground need only be “a reason” behind the persecution. Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 358- 60 (9th Cir. 2017). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Ortuno has failed to show that his membership in a particular social group, in his case his family membership, is a reason for fear of persecution. He has not shown that family 2 membership was a reason for past extortion attempts or for any threats of future harm. He presented no evidence that the deaths of his grand-nephew and nephew were on account of family ties. Ortuno stated that the people who attempted to extort him and his family did so because they ask everyone for money. Several members of his family continue to reside in Mexico safely. Fear of generalized criminality does not satisfy the nexus requirement. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1015-16 (9th Cir. 2010). 2. Under the Torture Convention, a petitioner bears the burden to show that “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). “Torture” means “any act by which severe …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals