NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 31 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUAN CARMONA-ROJAS, No. 17-72741 Petitioner, Agency No. A098-761-930 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 22, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Juan Carmona-Rojas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence * 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). the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review. In his opening brief, Carmona-Rojas does not challenge the agency’s determination that he failed to establish past persecution. 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 determination that Carmona-Rojas has not established that it is more likely than not he will be persecuted in Mexico on account of his family membership. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such group”); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members has no nexus to a protected ground”). We reject Carmona-Rojas’s contention that the BIA failed to properly analyze his withholding of removal claim in light of recent case law. Thus, we deny the petition for review as to his withholding of removal claim. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 17-72741 17-72741 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Juan Carmona-Rojas v. Jefferson Sessions, III 31 October 2018 Agency Unpublished 7465aab4766243a789cf4769c9fd966a4be57fc4
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals