Ricardo Flores-Vasquez v. Jefferson Sessions

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 21 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RICARDO FLORES-VASQUEZ, No. 14-72918 Petitioner, Agency No. A079-660-046 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 15, 2017** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Ricardo Flores-Vasquez, 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, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review. The agency found Flores-Vasquez established past persecution, but his presumption of future persecution was rebutted with evidence that Flores-Vasquez could safely and reasonably relocate within Mexico to avoid harm. Substantial evidence supports this finding. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b); Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 999 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal relocation finding supported where the record showed petitioner had safely relocated from his hometown for “several months”). We reject Flores-Vasquez’s contentions that the agency erred in its analysis. Thus, his withholding of removal claim fails. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Flores-Vasquez’s CAT claim because Flores-Vasquez did not demonstrate it is more likely than not he would be tortured in Mexico by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned. See Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 14-72918 14-72918 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Ricardo Flores-Vasquez v. Jefferson Sessions 21 November 2017 Agency Unpublished 6d2dd7da2fdfdd2d8b14ff616e3cea6eeb5feee3

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