FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 5 2021 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BRENDA GODINEZ-VELASQUEZ, No. 19-71783 AKA Brenda Godinez De Ruiz, Agency No. A094-955-439 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 3, 2021** San Francisco, California Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and IKUTA and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Brenda Godinez-Velasquez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that affirmed 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). decision of the immigration judge (IJ) denying her application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition for review. Godinez-Velasquez does not challenge the IJ’s conclusion that her proposed social group—“victims of sexual violence who do not have the protection of the government”—lacks social distinction. Because an applicant for withholding of removal seeking relief based on membership in a particular social group must establish that the proposed group is socially distinct, see Cordoba v. Barr, 962 F.3d 479, 483 (9th Cir. 2020), the BIA did not err in upholding the IJ’s denial of Godinez-Velasquez’s application for withholding of removal. The BIA did not err in affirming the IJ’s conclusion that Godinez-Velasquez was not entitled to relief under CAT. Given the IJ’s unchallenged finding that Godinez-Velasquez could safely relocate in Guatemala, substantial evidence supports the denial of withholding of removal under CAT, see 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(3)(ii); Singh v. Ashcroft, 351 F.3d 435, 443 (9th Cir. 2003), and deferral of removal under CAT, see 8 C.F.R § 1208.17(a). The BIA’s determination that Godinez-Velasquez suffered past persecution does not affect this conclusion, or our conclusion on statutory withholding of removal. PETITION DENIED. 2 19-71783 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Brenda Godinez-Velasquez v. Robert Wilkinson 5 February 2021 Agency Unpublished e9a206cde0ed1ad3e0a03c9d9de7865de50926a1
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals