NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 26 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ARMANDO LUNA-CORREA, No. 19-70892 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-776-708 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 18, 2019** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Armando Luna-Correa, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual * 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). 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 Luna-Correa failed to establish that he was or would be persecuted on account of a protected ground, including a particular social group. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such group” (emphasis in original)); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An [applicant’s] desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Luna-Correa’s withholding of removal claim fails. Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Luna-Correa failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Zheng v. Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011) (possibility of torture too speculative); Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010) (generalized evidence of violence and crime in Mexico is insufficient to meet 2 19-70892 standard for CAT relief). Luna-Correa’s opposed motion for a stay of removal is denied as moot. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 19-70892 19-70892 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Armando Luna-Correa v. William Barr 26 November 2019 Agency Unpublished 30fcd3bdbf1bde304971785a7ffa08c4c79d2074
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals