NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 22 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FRANCISCO CARRETO DIAZ, No. 19-73070 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-762-510 v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of an Immigration Judge Submitted June 17, 2022** San Francisco, California Before: S.R. THOMAS, BEA, and H. THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Francisco Carreto Diaz, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of the order of an Immigration Judge (IJ) that rejected Carreto Diaz’s appeal from an asylum officer’s determination that Carreto Diaz lacked a reasonable fear of persecution or torture. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not * 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). recount them here except as necessary to provide context for our ruling. We review legal questions de novo and the agency’s factual findings for substantial evidence. See Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition for review. Carreto Diaz claims that he fears persecution and torture from three sources: 1) robbers who repeatedly robbed the Coca-Cola delivery trucks that Carreto Diaz used to drive; 2) his brother, a local cartel leader; and 3) other cartels or individuals who Carreto Diaz believes will target him because of his close family relation to his brother, the cartel leader. On this basis, he seeks withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).1 To qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate a “‘clear probability’ of future persecution” on account of “race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.” Garcia v. Holder, 749 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir. 2003)). The IJ reasonably found that Carreto Diaz failed to establish his eligibility for withholding of removal. Carreto Diaz did not establish that the robberies he suffered in the past were on account of any protected ground. And as for Carreto Diaz’s cartel-member brother, the IJ reasonably found that Carreto Diaz 1 To the extent Carreto Diaz seeks asylum, he is ineligible because he is subject to a reinstated order of removal. See Perez-Guzman v. Lynch, 835 F.3d 1066, 1082 (9th Cir. 2016). 2 was not harmed or persecuted in the past (either by Carreto Diaz’s brother or by other individuals) and had not presented “credible, direct, and specific evidence” that he has an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution. Rusak v. Holder, 734 F.3d 894, 896 (9th Cir. 2013). To be eligible for CAT relief, Carreto Diaz must show that he will, more likely than not, be tortured with the consent or acquiescence of a public official if removed to his …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals