FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 15 2022 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ARNULFO VARGAS-CORTES, No. 21-70322 Petitioner, Agency No. A077-490-813 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Judge Submitted March 11, 2022** Portland, Oregon Before: GRABER, BEA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Arnulfo Vargas-Cortes, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) determination that Petitioner failed to establish a reasonable possibility of persecution or torture if he is removed to * 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). Mexico. Reviewing the IJ’s decision for substantial evidence, Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016), we deny the petition. 1. Substantial evidence supports the determination that Petitioner did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Mexico The IJ properly addressed both particularized social groups proposed by Petitioner. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1137 (9th Cir. 2016) (concluding that the Board of Immigration Appeals’ construction of the phrase “particular social group” is permissible and entitled to deference). Although Petitioner contends that Reyes was wrongly decided, it is binding precedent for this court. The IJ also permissibly determined that Petitioner failed to demonstrate a nexus between any risk of harm and Petitioner’s membership in either of those alleged particular social groups. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that an applicant’s desire to be free from random criminal activity bears “no nexus” to a protected ground). 2. Substantial evidence also supports the determination that Petitioner failed to show that the Mexican government would acquiesce or be willfully blind to any potential torture. Petitioner’s evidence that friends have told him that the police work with cartels and that the police are ineffective at investigating crimes does not compel a contrary finding. See Andrade-Garcia, 828 F.3d at 836 (“[A] general 2 ineffectiveness on the government’s part to investigate and prevent crime will not suffice to show acquiescence.”) PETITION DENIED. 3 21-70322 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Arnulfo Vargas-Cortes v. Merrick Garland 15 March 2022 Agency Unpublished 1ff4d81afc0a5dd8d635044bef5edc5e8196f660
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals