NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 6 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FERNANDO TORRES-RODRIGUEZ, No. 19-72296 Petitioner, Agency No. A205-699-974 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted December 10, 2020 Seattle, Washington Before: BERZON, MILLER, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Fernando Torres-Rodriguez, a citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming, in relevant part, the denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition. 1. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Torres-Rodriguez * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. did not demonstrate a nexus between his membership in his claimed particular social group of his family and the harm that he feared. Torres-Rodriguez testified that his father was kidnapped by a drug cartel because the cartel believed he might be related to a Torres family involved with a rival cartel. That Torres-Rodriguez’s father was released without further harm supports the BIA’s conclusion that the cartel has no continuing animus toward Torres-Rodriguez’s family. Torres- Rodriguez also acknowledged that the name Torres is not uncommon in his area and is shared by many people unrelated to him. Torres-Rodriguez’s evidence therefore does not compel a finding that his family is being specifically targeted by the cartel on account of their family ties. See Mendoza-Alvarez v. Holder, 714 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th Cir. 2013). Additionally, the immigration judge determined that the harms suffered by Torres-Rodriguez’s cousins, who do not share the Torres name, did not confirm that the cartel was interested in attacking Torres-Rodriguez’s family because of an imputed connection to another cartel that included people with the name Torres. Instead, those attacks indicated that the cartel directed suspicion and violence generally at people “coming from an area where a rival cartel has power.” This conclusion, with which the BIA agreed, is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Torres-Rodriguez testified that the Knights Templar cartel that harmed his cousins believes that all people from the area are affiliated with Jalisco Nueva 2 Generacion, and that “the majority of the people from there . . . get stopped” by the Knights Templar when going into the city of Zihautanejo. A generalized fear of crime and violence does not establish a nexus to a protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010). Because the BIA affirmed the immigration judge on nexus grounds, we need not consider the BIA’s additional conclusion that Torres-Rodriguez’s claimed particular social group of his family is not cognizable under Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I. & N. Dec. 581 (A.G. 2019). 2. Although the BIA could have more clearly adopted the immigration judge’s findings as to Torres-Rodriguez’s CAT claim or discussed the country ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals