NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 3 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JILBERT MANSOURI, No. 17-72645 Petitioner, Agency No. A097-093-324 v. MEMORANDUM* MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 27, 2018** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Jilbert Mansouri, a native and citizen of Iran, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have * 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). jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that the harm Mansouri suffered did not rise to the level of persecution. See Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1059-60 (9th Cir. 2009) (petitioner failed to establish past persecution where he was beaten and robbed on two occasions and accosted by a mob). Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s finding that Mansouri did not establish a well- founded fear of future persecution. See id. at 1060 (objective risk is established by a “‘reasonable possibility’ that [petitioner] will be ‘singled out individually for persecution’”). Thus, his asylum claim fails. In this case, Mansouri failed to establish eligibility for asylum, therefore, he did not establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d at 1190. Thus, his withholding of removal claim fails. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Mansouri failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Iranian government. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). 2 17-72645 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 17-72645 17-72645 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Jilbert Mansouri v. Matthew Whitaker 3 December 2018 Agency Unpublished 909179c6ad7c764af85912b03ebbf19596a57b3b
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals