NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 30 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LUIS ENRIQUE RAMIREZ No. 20-70489 BETANCURD, Agency No. A202-083-120 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 1, 2022** Before: FRIEDLAND, SANCHEZ, and H. THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Luis Enrique Ramirez Betancurd, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for * 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). asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo the legal question of whether a particular social group is cognizable, except to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the governing statutes and regulations. Conde Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241-42 (9th Cir. 2020). We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Id. at 1241. We deny the petition for review. The agency did not err in concluding that Ramirez Betancurd did not establish membership in a cognizable particular social group. See Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (in order to demonstrate membership in a particular social group, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))); see also Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-55 (9th Cir. 2009) (concluding that young Guatemalan men who resist gang recruitment did not constitute a particular social group), abrogated in part on other grounds by Henriquez-Rivas v. Holder, 707 F.3d 1081, 1093 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc). Thus, Ramirez Betancurd’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. 2 20-70489 Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection because Ramirez Betancurd failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala. Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 20-70489 20-70489 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Luis Ramirez Betancurd v. Merrick Garland 30 June 2022 Agency Unpublished 227cf4a28a61a1dc6119107b4e50afa2a67f4dcd
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals