Jose Soto-Reynoso v. Jefferson Sessions

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 13 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE SOTO-REYNOSO, No. 16-71120 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-806-094 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted July 10, 2018** Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Jose Soto-Reynoso, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction * 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). under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1012 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. In his opening brief, Soto-Reynoso does not challenge the agency’s conclusion that he failed to establish his proposed social group of “business owners,” was cognizable. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Soto-Reynoso failed to establish it is more likely than not that he will be persecuted in Mexico based on his familial ties. See Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir. 2001) (“An applicant’s claim of persecution upon return is weakened, even undercut, when similarly-situated family members continue to live in the country without incident[.]”). Thus, we deny the petition as to Soto-Reynoso’s withholding of removal claim. Finally, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Soto-Reynoso failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Mexico. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009). 2 16-71120 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 16-71120 16-71120 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Jose Soto-Reynoso v. Jefferson Sessions 13 July 2018 Agency Unpublished 1061a717d0411d814a274552ae8cb6a7231cfe16

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals